[NYtenants-online] TenantNet election picks - Manh. Borough President

[Tenant]

NYtenants Online/TenantNet                                9/12/05
=================================================================


This is a follow-up to our earlier newsletter on tomorrow's primary 
election. Tenants will pick candidates for the November general election 
for Mayor, Public Advocate and District Attorney.

If you live in Manhattan, you will also pick a primary winner for Manhattan 
Borough President. This has been the hardest choice to make of all the 
races. It seems like this race was designed to attract as much political 
drek that Gotham can muster.

So what IS a Borough President? It's a holdover from the Board of Estimate 
(abolished in 1989) and from years ago when the five boroughs had more power.

The Borough President:

1. Appoints community board members. There are twelve community boards in 
Manhattan with up to 50 members each. The myth is that these volunteer 
bodies are small-town democracies in action. The reality is that they are 
used to justify bad decisions of Council Members and Borough Presidents who 
appoint the members. While there are a few good members left, Virginia 
Fields has left Manhattan Community Boards resembling the toxic water from 
New Orleans, appointing landlords, developers, noisy bar owners, political 
hacks and generally people who like to take naps during meetings. It's not 
a place for the hardworking and industrious. Perhaps T.S. Eliot was 
prescient when he wrote of the April surprise (referring to when new 
community board members are appointed).

2. Occasionally has a non-binding but political 'cover-your-ass' vote on 
land use issues as part of the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP).

3. is a stepping-stone to higher office (or a holding pattern for City 
Council members term-limited out of City Hall).

4. has a discretionary percentage of the City budget, so they can feed some 
money to not-for-profit groups in return for political support. Open the 
library for another hour and the not-for-profits will support that skyscraper.

5. has the ability to get some press (It's what lazy reporters from Room 9 
cover when they're on vacation).


With that in mind and given the field of nine, the better question is which 
candidate will help the Mayor and City Council to weaken tenant 
protections, bull-doze your neighborhood or open up that nightclub across 
the street.

First, anyone thinking of voting for CARLOS MANZANO should have their head 
examined. It's a vanity candidacy for the corrupt West Side McManus 
Democratic (some would say Republican) Club. Manzano has no experience and 
exudes incompetence. In political circles, he's the joke candidate. Look 
beyond his "new ideas" and you see Joe Lieberman and every right-wing 
Democrat out there. The McManus Club (of which he's the President as long 
as Jimmy McManus finds him in favor [sic]), supported the Jets stadium. He 
held a separate fund raiser for landlord attorneys on August 17th and 
maintain two landlord attorneys to prey on unsuspecting tenants who go to 
the club for help.

STANLEY MICHELS, former City Council Member from Northern Manhattan, has 
little support and might be looking for his last hurrah. He supported the 
8th Avenue rezoning in 1997 that would have made it even easier for 
skyscrapers on the West Side of 8th Avenue north of 42nd Street. While some 
saw him as fairly good on tenant issues, when push came to shove, when 
Peter Vallone gutted tenant protections, Michels was nowhere to be seen.

KEITH WRIGHT, Assembly Member from Harlem, supported the stadium. Some see 
his candidacy as a stalking horse put up by Congressman Charles Rangel to 
torpedo the candidacy of Bill Perkins (see below) by splitting the black 
vote. Stay away.

MARGARITA LOPEZ, Council Member of the Lower East Side, once had promise 
and we supported her in 1997. Since then she has squandered many 
opportunities, becoming chummy with Peter Vallone and Michael Bloomberg. 
Some say that she might get a commissioner position from Bloomberg if he 
wins a second term. She's been a friend to developers (Cooper Union) and 
bar owners. Lately she's been accused of taking political campaign 
donations from members of the Church of Scientology in exchange for her 
directing city budget dollars to a church program. She may split the Latino 
vote with Adriano Espaillot and Carlos Manzano and the gay vote with Brian 
Ellner. When we approached her office to oppose the stadium in 2002, the 
response was, "what stadium?" (that was after she stood on the steps of 
City Hall in 2000 to oppose the stadium). In 2004 she ended up supporting 
the stadium, then tried to back away from that stand in 2005. Conviction 
and principle do not seem to be Lopez's strong points and she seems 
oblivious to legitimate criticism.

ADRIANO ESPAILLOT is an uptown Assembly Member, but his campaign seems to 
have no spark. This is unfortunate as he has said some very good things. 
But we know little of his record or character.

BRIAN ELLNER never has held public office and seems to be basing his 
candidacy on his being gay. We've seen nothing else. The Borough President 
does not represent just the gays. Although his commercial where he 
acknowledged his partner was outstanding, as a candidate we find him 
severely wanting.

BILL PERKINS, a term-limited Council Member from Harlem has done some very 
good work when it came to the Lead Paint bill or more recently with an 
effort to gain control over the Landmarks process. While seen as a strong 
candidate (and he opposed the West Side stadium), he supported the Hudson 
Yards rezoning that stands to displace many residents and small businesses. 
 From we can tell he also supports Inclusionary Zoning which creates a net 
LOSS of affordable housing. There are concerns that his ties to Virginia 
Fields could result in a continuance of the horrible policies of Virginia 
Fields. It's ironic that some downtown tenant groups support Perkins, but 
if you ask some of his constituents, you get a report card that is much 
less glowing. People said he ignores his constituents and is very arrogant. 
His recent endorsement by Michael McKee raises serious questions of his 
true support for tenants and neighborhoods.

"Don't get Mad, Get Eva" might be a slogan that overshadows what many of 
her constituents call her ("Evil Moskowitz") referring to EVA MOSKOWITZ'S 
reported no-show constituent support. While we're not that familiar with 
her record other than her giving the teacher's union apoplexy, she was part 
of the 2001 Council Pac that helped Gifford Miller attain the Council 
Speakership (and the subsequent harm to tenants). Along with Miller and 
Chris Quinn, the trio collected money and spread it around to other Council 
Members for their votes for Miller. (Quinn is doing the same thing this 
year). While Moskowitz is seen as a strong candidate, we've seen little to 
be impressed. Like Lopez and Perkins, she supported Hudson Yards. Lately 
she's complaining -- perhaps with good reason -- of unfounded attacks by 
Scott Stringer and the Working Families Party (i.e., Wrecking Families Party).

SCOTT STRINGER appears to be the strongest candidate. The West Side 
Assembly Member has done good work in the past, but he is not the reformer 
he would like the voters to think that he is. He's as much a part of the 
Albany machine as is Sheldon Silver.

In the last few years though, Stringer has moved to the right, become more 
developer-friendly and supported the Hudson Yards plan for 24+ skyscrapers 
in the midst of Clinton/Hell's Kitchen and Chelsea neighborhoods. He was 
part of the subterfuge created by Christine Quinn, supporting the groups 
that misled the public.

Earlier, he released a report calling into question the political 
corruption of Manhattan community boards (a swipe at Virginia Fields and 
Margarita Lopez), but he failed to raise issues of corruption from Boards 4 
and 7 (which his district covers) and his being endorsed by Walter Mankoff, 
former Chair of Board 4 -- undoubtedly the worst of Manhattan's 12 
community boards.

So here's the rub: with nine candidates and no runoff, a candidate could 
emerge the winner with as little as 20-25% of the vote. That is scary.

We do not find any of these candidates attractive and worthy of support. 
But one will win. Activists around town have been calling and emailing each 
other expressing angst over which candidate to support.

While it seems Stringer has the political support to win, he is potentially 
the most dangerous of all the candidates. He's an operator and he's smart. 
He has the ability to do exactly what Quinn did: give developers everything 
they want and convince the public he's in their corner.

We have little cheer over. If you want a strong candidate, then perhaps 
Stringer is your choice. That would help communities ONLY of he had a 
meaningful agenda to help neighborhoods against a City Planning Department, 
City Council and Mayor all of whom seem to nothing more than heap more and 
more corporate welfare on landlords and developers. He would help tenants 
ONLY if he had a meaningful agenda to stand up to Sheldon Silver and Vito 
Lopez - who together have allowed both parties to gut tenant protections.

If his agenda is anything less than that, than the public will have a hard 
road to follow.

If Stringer's not to your liking, consider Ellner or Espaillot. They may 
not be as invested in NYC political corruption; both are unknown 
commodities. So is a Ham Sandwich.