Join us!
Local

  • GSD Judicial Delegate Report (2018)

    Grand Street Dems delegates participated this year for the first time in the Democratic party’s convention to select nominees for NY Supreme Court. It’s a process hidden from most voters. Delegates to the judicial convention are elected from each Assembly District during the September primary, but if there is no contested ballot for those delegates (as is usually the case), these delegates’ names won’t even show up on the ballot in September, they are just automatically installed by the party.

    This year GSD members nominated two delegates — actually one delegate and one alternate. Other Democratic clubs in Assembly District 65 also nominated delegates, and by agreement between the clubs a slate of 5 delegates and 5 alternates was determined.

    All delegates had a chance to hear from the many candidates for NY Supreme Court. A forum for all candidates was hosted by Village Independent Democrats and Downtown Independent Democrats, which GSD delegates attended. The judicial convention for New York’s 1st Judicial District (Manhattan) was held on Sept. 20, 2018.

    Here is the convention report from GSD’s delegates:

    Notes on the Judicial Convention for 1st Judicial District (New York County) 9.20.18

    The convention is called to order and after some procedural beginnings the roll is called for each elected Judicial Delegate, grouped by Assembly District, to answer that they are present.

    Alternates only serve if a delegate from their Assembly District is not present at the convention. The alternates are ordered for the entire Assembly District. (E.g. the First Alternate serves if anyone is missing from our District, its not that a GSD Alternate serves if GSD Delegate is missing.)

    This year there are three open positions for Supreme Court Justice. We had heard in advance through buzz from candidates that this year two of the nominations were “locked up.” And that then was how it played out. This could be that these two candidates in fact had committed/pledged support from a majority of Delegates (this year 84). However it could also be that these two candidates had created the perception that they had a majority of supporters, and then other candidates were pressured to “wait their turn” and withdraw. In any event, seemingly every candidate agreed to this procedure and knew in advance. Establishing support in advance and communicating that support to the powers that be is apparently critical.

    After roll call, a specific person was called to nominate the first candidate for one of the Judicial openings. That person nominated Alex Tish with a brief speech. Then another named person was called to seconded the nomination without a speech. Very quickly it was asked, are there any other nominations, no pause. Then a voice vote was called and essentially everyone said “aye” with no “nay” votes or abstentions. Tish then gave a speech accepting the nomination, thanking people and telling them to join him at an after party.

    The same procedure then happened for the second opening with Lynn Kotler receiving and winning the nomination, again by an uncontested voice vote.

    [Note that Lynn thanked her home political club, Chelsea, & Alex was a former District Leader. Most nominations or seconds were made by District Leaders. So one strong base of club support also seems crucial for judicial success.]

    Chair then recognized someone by name to nominate for the third position. John J. Kelly was nominated & seconded. Kelly had said at VID/DID/VRDC/GSD Judicial Candidate Forum the week before that he was not “contesting a seat” this year. (Other excellent candidates said the same thing at the convention.) He came up and gave a quick speech declining his nomination.

    Then someone else is nominated (Lou Knock) and seconded & they also know he is going to withdraw (because seconding speech says “please remember him for next year”). He withdraws and says he is going to speak to everyone he can over the next year. So really they are lobbying all year once they’ve gotten through the panel.

    [The panel process (see http://manhattandemocrats.org/2018/07/2018-supreme-court-independent-screening-panel/) is set up with different legal groups each invited to put their own member on the committee. This is intended to give it a non-political stance focuses on qualifications. The panel then “reports out” applicants as “Most Highly Qualified” (the only approved category).  The full sentence is that they “were reported out by the panel as most highly qualified.” Every candidate was “reported out” by the panel this year OR has been reported out in 2 of the last four. So-called “two-fours” do not have to reapply to the panel this year. Frustratingly the full list was not on the Manhattan Dems website but it was on its Facebook page.  One of the nominators said the Panel is non-political, and then the nominations can be political.]

    The same then happened with Jennifer Schecter, Aletha Drysdale, Lisa Sokolov, Carol Sharpe, Paul Goetz, Ta-Tanisha James, David Cohen, Sabrina Krause, Cory Weston, Dakota Ramseur, Melissa Crane, Michelle Sweeting.  (I wonder if this order says something about the order of likelihood to win next year.) These were all but two of the remaining candidates that were found qualified by the panel.

    Note that every nominator & second nominator called was explicitly decided in order in advance, and announced with out taking volunteers or solicitation from the delegates. But how that decision was made is unclear.

    Then the contested race: Mary Rosado nominated & seconded. Following that another person called to nominate Shawn T Kelly.

    Without any remarks for these two candidates or further discussion, the Chair then called on each Assembly District to give the total of their delegates votes. We were 3 for Rosado (UDO, GSD & Lower East Side Dems); and 2 for Kelly (DID & New Downtown Dems). One Assembly District said they “historically vote as a block” and did.  The vote was unusually close with a final official count of Rosado 47 to Kelly 37! The convention was adjourned soon after.

    A few other notes for the future:

    • All of the candidates except Rosado had been elected as Civil Court judges (except for one who had been appointed by Mayor de Blasio as a criminal court judge), and elevated to Acting Supreme Court Judges because of the court backlog and the need for more judges to handle it. In Rosado’s case, since she had not been elevated to Acting Supreme Court, and was in New York County, it opens up another Civil Court vacancy next year that could be a good place for a judge candidate we supported this year who didn’t make it.
    • The number of delegates for each Assembly District is determined by the total vote for Governor on the Democratic line in the general election. So next year, new delegate apportionment will be made based on results from November’s election.
    • This year the person elected as our Grand Street Democrats delegate to the convention had discretion to vote how he thought best (although he conferred with our alternate and club President).  Next year we might want to open up the judicial candidate evaluation process (basically attending one co-sponsored forum with all the candidates) to the full club and have those present vote on the club recommendations (more like our endorsement process) which the delegate will then follow at the convention (this seems to be the process for some other reform clubs).

    Three helpful links, info on our judicial district; the only “official” explanation of this judicial delegate and convention process (see especially pages 25-27); and the other a recent news article critical of the process:

  • Proposed NYC Charter amendments (2018)

    A commission convened by the Mayor has proposed three amendments to the NYC Charter that will be on the ballot this November during the general election. Below is a guide for voters from the New York City Campaign Finance Board.

    Proposal #1: Campaign Finance

    This proposal would amend the City Charter to lower the amount a candidate for City elected office may accept from a contributor. It would also increase the public funding used to match a portion of the contributions received by a candidate who participates in the City’s public financing program.

    In addition, the proposal would make public matching funds available earlier in the election year to participating candidates who can demonstrate need for the funds. It would also ease a requirement that candidates for Mayor, Comptroller, or Public Advocate must meet to qualify for matching funds.

    The amendments would apply to participating candidates who choose to have the amendments apply to their campaigns beginning with the 2021 primary election, and would then apply to all candidates beginning in 2022.

    Proposal #2: Civic Engagement Commission

    This proposal would amend the City Charter to:

    Create a Civic Engagement Commission that would implement, no later than the City Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2020, a Citywide participatory budgeting program established by the Mayor to promote participation by City residents in making recommendations for projects in their communities;

    Require the Commission to partner with community based organizations and civic leaders, as well as other City agencies, to support and encourage civic engagement efforts;

    Require the Commission to establish a program to provide language interpreters at City poll sites, to be implemented for the general election in 2020;

    Permit the Mayor to assign relevant powers and duties of certain other City agencies to the Commission;

    Provide that the Civic Engagement Commission would have 15 members, with 8 members appointed by the Mayor, 2 members by the City Council Speaker and 1 member by each Borough President; and

    Provide for one of the Mayor’s appointees to be Commission Chair and for the Chair to employ and direct Commission staff.

    Proposal # 3: Community Boards

    This proposal would amend the City Charter to:

    Impose term limits of a maximum of four consecutive full two-year terms for community board members with certain exceptions for the initial transition to the new term limits system;

    Require Borough Presidents to seek out persons of diverse backgrounds in making appointments to community boards. The proposal would also add new application and reporting requirements related to these appointments; and

    If Question 2, “Civic Engagement Commission,” is approved, require the proposed Civic Engagement Commission to provide resources, assistance, and training related to land use and other matters to community boards.

    Update: At its fall meeting on 10/4/18, Grand Street Democrats voted to recommend a “Yes” vote for only Proposal #1, and voted to recommend a “No” vote for Proposals #2 and #3.

  • Proposed letter to elected officials regarding air quality during L Train shutdown

    At our fall meeting on Thursday, Grand Street Dems will have a chance to approve the following letter to our elected officials urging them to make sure air quality tests are conducted before and during the L Train shutdown to monitor the air quality in neighborhoods like ours that will see a significant increase in diesel bus traffic.

    Read the proposed letter below.

    Update: The letter below was approved by Grand Street Dems at our meeting on 10/4/18. The letter has also been signed by many other neighborhood groups and local officials. The final letter can be viewed here:

    Update 2: In a big victory, the MTA has agreed to monitor air quality all along the bus route during the L Train shutdown. 

  • Hyper-local primary results

    Grand Street Democrats officially is responsible for Part A of Assembly District 65. That’s a small slice of the Lower East Side comprised of all four Grand Street co-ops (East River, Hillman, Amalgamated, and Seward Park); half a dozen buildings of Vladeck Houses on Jackson Street; a block of low-rises bordered by Henry, Clinton, East Broadway, and Montgomery; and a few additional addresses sprinkled in between.

    Map of Assembly District 65 Part A.

    We know who won last week’s primary, but how did they do just in our part?

    Andrew Cuomo won more votes for Governor, but by a much smaller margin than in the state overall.

    Jumaane Williams picked up more votes here for Lt. Governor than the statewide winner, Kathy Hochul. (Though you can see that Williams matched Cynthia Nixon’s vote total, while Hochul had a 24% drop-off from Cuomo, her running-mate.)

    In a four-way race for Attorney General, Zephyr Teachout won the neighborhood, with eventual winner Tish James a close second.

    Robert Rosenthal lost a close race for Civil Court Judge in the 2nd Judicial District, but bested Wendy Li by 17 points in our neighborhood.

    Finally, in the race for Democratic State Committee, Chris Marte beat his opponent here by an even bigger margin than in the full Assembly District.

  • Sept. 24: Sister District Fundraiser and Party

    Sister District is a national organization working to connect Democrats in deep blue districts (like us) with state candidates in purple districts who are at the front lines of the blue wave.

    This year, New York’s Sister District chapters are supporting Liz Hanbidge and Tina Davis in Pennsylvania. GSD volunteers helped phone bank for Hanbidge earlier this year, and now we have a chance to meet both candidates at a fundraiser on Monday, September 24.

    Sister District Fundraiser for Liz Hanbidge and Tina Davis

    Monday, September 24
    6:00 – 9:00 p.m.

    Sid Gold’s Request Room
    165 W. 26th St.

    Stars from Frozen and Wicked and other shows will perform, and there will be an auction for backstage passes to Broadway hits.

    You can attend without donating or donate without attending, but please do both!

    RSVP

  • Congratulations, Christopher Marte

    In last Thursday’s primary, local activist Christopher Marte won a resounding victory over his challenger for a position on the NY State Democratic Committee.

    This is an internal party position, usually dominated by Albany insiders. Chris brings with him a history of community activism and a commitment to progressive policies, and promises to join a small but growing progressive caucus within this party apparatus dedicated to making our party’s internal rules and deliberations more transparent and equitable.

    Congratulations, Chris!

  • Primary election results for 9/13/18

    Grand Street Democrats had a chance to vote in five contests on Thursday, September 13. The winners are:

    • Andrew Cuomo for Governor
    • Kathy Hochul for Lt. Governor
    • Letitia James for Attorney General
    • Wendy Li for Civil Court Judge
    • Christopher Marte for Democratic State Committee

    Congratulations to all the candidates, and thank you to all our volunteers in the neighborhood who helped get out the vote!

  • Sign up to volunteer for the Primary

  • DOT has no proposals yet for Grand/Clinton congestion

    Staff from the NYC Department of Transportation presented to Community Board 3’s Transportation Committee on Thursday, June 28, 2018 in regards to the traffic on Grand, Clinton, and East Broadway.

    DOT promised elected officials a traffic study of the area in 2017, but by the end of last year could say only that no conclusions could be drawn until after Essex Crossing construction is completed. Additional pressure from community leaders and elected officials this year brought DOT back to the neighborhood … but its report last week was still inconclusive.

    The DOT says that data traffic collected this spring still needs to be analyzed. Aside from minor changes to signage and light-timing, no new proposals were presented for review by the CB3 committee.

    What we did see were slides indicating a dozen or so proposals from the community that DOT has said it will be considering in the coming months, plus an estimated timeline that pushes any real proposals to the end of 2018. No date has been set for a return to CB3, and it was noted that this timeline pushes right up against considerations for L Train shutdown mitigation beginning spring 2019, which will make it even more difficult to implement.

    In the past two months, DOT has made small changes to make drivers aware of other ways to the Williamsburg Bridge:

    • signage southbound on the FDR has removed the word “alternate” from the Houston Street exit;
    • new signs have been placed on Grand to let drivers know that both lanes will get them to the bridge (using Clinton and Norfolk); and
    • a “no-honking” sign has been moved slightly east on Grand to warn drivers earlier to lay off their horn.

    Coming soon:

    • A new traffic agent will hopefully be assigned to the Clinton/East Broadway intersection to help pedestrians cross there during rush hour and keep drivers from blocking the intersection.
    • DOT is also experimenting with light timing along Grand Street to increase the flow of traffic.

    Now DOT is modelling more far-reaching proposals based on recent data:

    • Eliminate Clinton access to bridge. Create dedicated left turn from Essex to Delancey (safer than before). Can Essex and Allen Streets handle the additional capacity? Estimated analysis completion: Aug. 2018.
    • Reduce Clinton traffic by eliminating left turn from East Broadway, Henry, and Madison during rush. Can Essex and Allen Streets handle the additional capacity? Estimated analysis completion: Aug. 2018.
    • Open access on Delancey Street from FDR to bridge. DOT is not sure Delancey has the physical characteristics for this to be possible. Parking in the neighborhood would be reduced, and the NYPD and FDNY at Pitt and Delancey would need to be accomodated. Estimated analysis completion: Dec. 2018.

    CB3 will invite DOT back in the fall. In the meantime, we believe that continued pressure from elected officials and community leaders, including members of Grand Street Democrats, will be critical in forcing DOT to recognize that Clinton Street is not an appropriate approach to the Williamsburg Bridge.

    Here are the slides from DOT’s presentation on June 28:

  • The news gets worse and worse. Here’s what we can do …

    In the past few weeks the Trump administration has become even more Orwellian. The actions and language around so-called “tender care” shelters epitomizes the worst treatment of refugees and undocumented people in our country. Wednesday’s executive order should not be mistaken for real progress.

    So what now?

    1) Donate. The legal and therapeutic services on the ground have massive work to do, both to reunite children and parents currently separated, and to help aid these families manage their ongoing trauma. Donations at this link will be distributed among 10 excellent organizations, including the ACLU, La Union del Pueblo Entero, and the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services.

    2) Rally. Protests will be held nation-wide on Saturday, June 30 including here in NYC. Grand Street Democrats will partner with our friends at the Manny Cantor Center to organize a crew from the LES. Sign-making will be on Friday, June 29 from 4:00 – 6:00 at MCC, 4th floor. And then we’ll meet in front of MCC again the next morning at 9:15 am to go together to the rally in Foley Square. (Email me if you want to be more involved in organizing the neighborhood for this rally.)

    3) VOTE. In every election — including the Democratic primary coming up this Tuesday, June 26. Our endorsed congressional candidate for NY-12, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, has a strong record of standing up to Trump and we know she deserves another term to defend our values. (If you’d like to help Get Out the Vote for Maloney over the next 5 days, sign up here.)

    In solidarity,
    Caroline Laskow, Democratic District Leader

    PS. An even bigger ask, but also important: can you work in your local poll site on Election Day? It’s a really long day but without our poll workers our elections wouldn’t happen. And you do get paid. Just email me if you are interested.