City Council Leadership Denied Lawmakers a Look at the Details of a $75 billion City Budget

Withholding of City Budget Details Undermines Financial Oversight and Checks and Balances

RELATED Council Staffers Withheld Budget Documents From Lawmakers (The Wall Street Journal) New York City Budget : Vote First, Read Later (The Wall Street Journal) Melissa Mark-Viverito Is Quiet on City Council’s Budget Losses (The New York Observer)

City Council Central Staff, reportable to Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, delayed sharing with all municipal lawmakers some of the budget paperwork for several hours on the day that the Council voted on the city budget. IN A CONTINUATION OF corrupt strong-arming of City Council votes, Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito's central staff deliberately withheld some budget documents from Councilmembers for up to six hours before the full Council would vote on the Fiscal Year 2015 $75 billion city budget. The phony reason that Speaker Mark-Viverito's central staff gave for holding back some of the budget paperwork was because all of the budget had not yet printed, and that staffers were told that “you don’t slow drip the budget,” as one person told The Wall Street Journal, whose City Hall reporter broke the story. But this blatant lie flies in the face of that fact that Council Speaker Mark-Viverito did "slow drip the budget" -- by dropping the 400+ page budget report of the speaker's slush fund, otherwise known as "Schedule C," the night before the Council voted on the city budget. Releasing the Schedule C report of slush fund allocations to politically-connected charities, Council Speaker Mark-Viverito satisfied Councilmembers' first order of business : how much tax dollars were they going to be able to award to nonprofit groups that helped Councilmembers with get out the vote efforts, mailing lists, and other soft forms of political contributions. By withholding the details of the FY2015 city budget up until the very last minute, the Council Speaker aimed to thwart any debate on or challenges to the budget by her fellow Councilmembers. Details of the city budget were probably largely dictated to the City Council by de Blasio administration Budget Director Dean Fuleihan on the mayor's behalf. Suppressing debate, examination, or challenges to the $75 billion budget is detrimental to the healthy function of the City Council. Political bloggers and government reform activists, such as Suzannah B. Troy, have long argued that the Council leadership under Speaker Mark-Viverito's predecessor deliberately thwarted investigations into corrupt multi-billion dollar technology outsourcing contracts, such as CityTime employee timekeeping system and the ECTP program of the 911 emergency call system. Who knows how many corrupt over-payments, contract-overrides, or payment extensions were granted under the city budget documents that Speaker Mark-Viverito's central staff deliberately withheld for several hours. But the Councilmembers surely did know how many millions they gave to quiet down police reform groups, to deescalate political pressure from the Left on the neoliberal de Blasio administration.

Cy Vance Power Bottom

PUBLISHED : TUES, 01 JUL 2014, 02:11 PM
UPDATED : TUES, 01 JUL 2014, 04:35 PM
Corrupt Politicians and Lobbyists Get Most of Their Power From the Bottom in Charge of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office

 

RELATED Charity tied to Council Speaker Mark-Viverito quadruples its slush funding (Crains New York Business) VIDEO : Cy Vance Dirty D.A. (Dropbox)

POLITICAL BLOGGERS and government reform activists today expressed frustration that another corrupt New York City Council speaker was going to use her control over a large multi-million slush fund to reward her lobbyists and campaign consultants, and there was nothing that Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance was going to do about it. The Hispanic Federation, a nonprofit organization founded and represented by Luis Miranda, a chief political consultant of Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, saw its pork-barrel funding quadruple in the speaker's first budget, through a slush fund system that critics say remains politicized despite some obligatory lip service to reforms. Press reports from The New York Post and Crains New York Business show that the Hispanic Federation consistently funnels money back to Mr. Miranda's campaign consulting and lobbying firm, the MirRam Group. Steering flush fund money to charities that then act as a "pass through entity" back to favored lobbyists and campaign consultants is business as usual in the City Council. Political bloggers and government reform activists alleged that Speaker Mark-Viverito's predecessor, Christine Quinn, did the same thing, reportedly using the High Line park as the "pass-through" to ultimately benefit Bolton-St. Johns, the lobbying firm headed by former Speaker Quinn's best friend, Emily Giske. The political, campaign, and slush fund corruption in New York City comes from learned behavior about how to rig the broken political system to keep enabling still yet more and more corruption. The possibility that Council Speaker Mark-Viverito's allocation of large, six-figure sums to charities that pay some of their money back to Speaker Mark-Viverito's political operatives is a blatant conflict of interest. Is this part of the way that the Council speaker "compensates" her campaign consultants through transactions that circumvent the city's campaign finance regulatory authority, the Campaign Finance Board ? The optics of these kinds of financial arrangements merit investigation, possible charges of corruption, and at the very least the issuance of new ethics rules of recusal and oversight. But we live in a city, where District Attorney Cy Vance is Mr. Fix It. Corrupt politicians, lobbyists, and other permanent government insiders know that D.A. Vance won't prosecute anybody, meaning, "the fix is in." Former Council Speaker Quinn and Ms. Giske got away with it, and Speaker Mark-Viverito and Mr. Miranda are gambling that they will, too. So, the crooked politicians keep exploiting the system. Does that mean D.A. Vance is a power bottom for every crooked politician in this city ? (No offense to power bottoms.) Corrupt politicians know that the prosecution of significant political or government individuals pose special problems for local and state prosecutors. Voters can tell how the clients of lobbyists and campaign consultants get preferential treatment over other schmucks, who lack the political connections with prosecutorial insiders. When Crains New York Business requested the e-mail correspondence between the New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and his ex-wife, political consultant powerhouse Jennifer Cunningham, the attorney general denied the Freedom of Information Law request. Similar to how the attorney general appears to be protecting his ex-wife from media scrutiny, some political bloggers and government reform activists charge that the attorney general protected politician clients of Ms. Cunningham from scrutiny. Ms. Cunningham worked on former Council Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign at a time when activists were demanding investigations into allegations of corruption during former Council Speaker Quinn's administration of the City Council, investigations which never came to pass.

Former Met Council Leader, Wm. Rapfogel, Enters Guilty Plea in Corruption Case

Following guilty plea convictions of Rapfogel and Cohen, Attorney General's investigation into public corruption continues.

William Rapfogel, the former leader of the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty, pled guilty today in state court to charges of "grand larceny, money laundering, tax fraud," and filing false documents with the city's campaign finance regulatory authority, the Campaign Finance Board, The New York Times reported today, adding that the guilty plea followed Mr. Rapfogel's arrest last September on charges of "grand larceny, money laundering, conspiracy and other crimes in a criminal complaint filed by the state attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman."

Mr. Rapfogel's predecessor, David Cohen, entered into his own guilty pleas to charges of grand larceny and conspiracy. Both men laundered some of their illicit gains into campaign contributions with the intention of manipulating the public matching dollar system of the city's Campaign Finance Board. "Mr. Cohen said he and Mr. Rapfogel also funneled some of the illicit money to candidates running for office, asking Mr. Ross to make contributions not only in his name but also in the names of straw donors," The New York Times report added. A press release from the Attorney General's office noted that, "These campaign contributions were made to politicians whom Rapfogel and Cohen believed could help Met Council."

• RELATED : William Rapfogel Pleads Guilty in Scheme to Loot New York Charity (The New York Times)
• RELATED : The $25,000 Century Coverage William Rapfogel Donations Christine Quinn Wants To Return Not Listed On Campaign Finance Board (No Third Term Blog)

Mere hours after bloggers had noted on August 12 of last year that Mr. Rapfogel's charity had received discretionary funding from former Council Speaker Christine Quinn's slush fund, former Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign announced that her campaign was returning $25,000 in campaign donations at the center of the William Rapfogel scandal.

The Attorney General's press release of today concluded that, "These convictions are a result of an ongoing investigation by the Attorney General’s Office in conjunction with New York State Comptroller DiNapoli, as part of the Joint Task Force on Public Integrity. The joint investigation by the Attorney General’s and Comptroller’s offices continues."

Let's hope former Speaker Quinn has a good defense attorney.

William Rapfogel : Another corrupt bundler of campaign contributions exploiting the @NYCCFB matching dollar system. http://t.co/es6EFlwAc8

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) April 23, 2014

U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara has said that a "show me the money" culture pervades all of New York government, and many bloggers and government reform activists agree. Last year, the political blogger and YouTube producer Suzannah B. Troy confronted New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who has had a decades-long close association with Mr. Rapfogel, and she asked Speaker Silver, "Are you part of the corruption ?"

Watching the Political Chess Pieces Move on the $10 billion New York State Medicaid Waiver

• UPDATED : $10 billion truth serum (The New York Daily News * 03 Feb 2014)

The political machinations at play over Cuomo's reëlection pork slush fund

Last month, New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo insulted Republicans by saying that "extreme conservatives" of the GOP had no place in New York state. How can Gov. Cuomo insult the political party that controls the House, which controls federal funding ? Ideological differences aside, the political reality is that Gov. Cuomo should keep the state on good terms with Republicans in order to "work the system," seeing as he is such a political insider, especially given how Gov. Cuomo is waiting on $10 billion in federal Medicaid funds to divert into pork projects in this year's budget to fluff his reëlection campaign. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is absolutely correct is not wanting to cross the GOP on this Medicaid waiver, because setting the frank realities aside (Like, who exacerbated the hospital closing crisis but Cuomo himself !!), why would the GOP want to see the Obama administration give a $10 billion re-electioneering slush fund to Gov. Cuomo after Gov. Cuomo just trashed the GOP ? If Obama/Sebelius have total discretion over approving this waiver, then President Obama may pay the price with amped-up vitriol from the GOP. It seems like Gov. Cuomo was flat out stupid to insult the GOP. Unless he was trying to score cheap political points by just using extremist talk, like one of my friends told me the other day . Even then, it was stupid.

• RELATED : Washington Politics Threaten 10 billion Cuomo Reelection Pork Slush Fund Spending (New York magazine * 29 Jan 2014)

There could be more than just normal beastly Washington politics causing the delay in the Medicaid waiver. If you want to really look behind the curtain, you might find former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's people causing the delay, too. President Obama supports Mrs. Clinton in her presumed campaign for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, so the last thing President Obama would want to do is to help prop up Gov. Cuomo's reëlectioneering pork plans with the $10 billion Medicaid waiver that Gov. Cuomo plans to turn into a slush fund. These monies are purported to be "savings," but they are in fact money that was gutted from Medicaid from the poorest people, preventing them from being able to access full-service hospital, comprehensive medical, or Level 1 Trauma care in times of emergency. Cuomo's plans for these monies have nothing to do with helping to fund Obamacare expansion plans, but, instead, to dole out for his reëlection campaign purposes. He is sleazy like that, and there's no way to expect that Gov. Cuomo will do the right and honorable thing with this kind of windfall. And Mrs. Clinton's people know that, too, and if you were Mrs. Clinton, why would you want to see your primary challenger make use of a $10 billion slush fund like that ? Mrs. Clinton's machine is slowly taking back control of the DNC, so there's that added motivation to block/cut the waiver, too.

• UPDATED : New York may have to give back some Medicaid funding (Capital New York * 03 Feb 2014)

Added to the political pressures on the $10 billion waiver is New York City mayor Bill de Blasio's tax hike for the rich. If the $10 billion is delayed or cut, then Gov. Cuomo will not have the money to fund the mayor's expansion of pre-kinder classes as he had promised, making it easier for Mayor de Blasio to argue that he needs his tax increase. Mayor de Blasio is also doing his best to see to it that Mrs. Clinton comes out on top of Gov. Cuomo, so the mayor has a partial motivation to see to it that the Medicaid waiver is delayed or cut, even to the detriment of NYC hospitals.

Bill de Blasio says Hillary Clinton would make a GREAT President.

— Gloria Pazmino (@GloriaPazmino) January 30, 2014

• RELATED : Friction Between de Blasio, Cuomo is Early Posturing for 2016 (Battery Park TV * 22 Jan 2014)

At the joint appearance by the mayor and governor, the governor and the mayor only committed to preserving emergency care in Brooklyn -- (the same bait-and-switch talk that former Council Speaker Christine Quinn shifted to regarding St. Vincent's) -- and the governor and mayor specifically refused to say that they'd save "full-service" hospital care. So, that $10 billion isn't going to be used to save Interfaith Medical Center or Long Island College Hospital as we would all like to see. The only way that Mayor de Blasio would go along with pressuring Secretary Sebelius to make good on the whole $10 billion waiver is if Gov. Cuomo promised to share some of that slush fund with NYC -- which we already know will not be used to save Brooklyn hospitals. The mayor is under tremendous budgetary pressure to deliver on approximately $7 billion in union contracts, and he needs all the money he can get.

The dark side question is : are "Leftists" really trusting the governor and the mayor to let some of that $10 billion trickle down to voters ? It's been my argument that, since I saw James Capalino campaign for BDB, the de Blasio administration would be controlled by lobbyists. Lobbyists are going to instruct the governor and the mayor on how to spend that money. My darkest fear is the people will not benefit from the money at all. Maybe the unions will get better contracts, but people who don't have lobbyists working for them will get nothing. As it is, the karma of this money is already questionable, since it represents Medicaid healthcare cuts to the poorest New Yorkers.

Lastly, I want to point out that President Obama himself may want to delay or cut the $10 billion. The president's administation has been a complete disaster. His last saving grace is to try to take credit for the rise of the (fake (read : no-reform)) progressivism that's emerging out of the new crop of (poser) politicians in New York City. President Obama himself may want to delay or cut the Medicaid waiver so that he can take credit for an income tax hike on the 1% for which the mayor is lobbying. The tax hike is a good thing, but all these backroom machinations and other mixed-motivations are what are at play. There's no way to predict what will happen, because these pieces keep moving....

SIDEBAR : If Staten Island Congressman Michael Grimm leaves office, the GOP will have less reason to care about New York. I hate myself for thinking like this, but we actually need a powerplayer GOP politician in New York to help focus the GOP on the dire economics of New York state. If we go completely blue, why would the GOP-controlled House care about us anymore ? President Obama's too weak to lead the Democrats to take back control of the House this November, so we are stuck with the GOP for the next few years. Insulting them doesn't work, not when Gov. Cuomo has his hands out, begging for a slush fund.

Explication of The New York Times Mayoral Endorsement of Christine Quinn

Queers Against Quinn respond to @nytimes endorsement of @Quinn4NY https://t.co/E9IjDCe4iR @colvinj @SallyGold @Azi pic.twitter.com/gPc2aoFt2t

— Stop Christine Quinn (@stopchrisquinn) August 24, 2013

The New York Times Mayoral Endorsement : Christine Quinn, the Democratic Choice

Following is a line-by-line explication of editorial in which New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn is endorsed by the Editorial Board of The New York Times :

WHAT THE NYTIMES WROTE	WHAT THE NYTIMES MEANS
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is almost gone.	Real estate developers and big business interests are worried about who is going to carry out Mayor Bloomberg's policies for the next eight years.
At year’s end there will be nothing more he can do to shape, alter or improve the City of New York.	The Editorial Board has been tasked by Mayor Bloomberg to help elect Christine Quinn.
It’s the end of 12 years of governing under one man’s singular, often inspiring, sometimes maddening priorities, which were as big as a rising ocean and as small as your soda cup.	The Editorial Board is afraid of calling out Mayor Bloomberg for the dictatorial ways that he has run New York City. He wouldn't have made it to three terms, unless Christine Quinn violated the two voter referenda that imposed term limits, something the Editorial Board is trying to cover up.
It was a vision that succeeded brilliantly, but incompletely.	The Editorial Board believes that Mayor Bloomberg should have done more to help the 1%.
But don’t worry, New York.	The Editorial Board doesn't want the Real Estate Board of New York or the Partnership For New York City, our last two groups of major advertisers, to worry.
Mr. Bloomberg’s is hardly the only way to run a city, and the excellent news is that there is a candidate who is ready to carry on at least as well as he did.	The Editorial Board is going to help Mayor Bloomberg anoint his own chosen successor.
She is one of seven Democrats who have been toiling for months in the primary race, standing before voters day and night in a marathon of civic engagement.	The Editorial Board believes that even through Christine Quinn has been in public office for 15 years, she has had to hurry up and do her "wawk and tawk" tour to try to introduce herself to the taxpayers paying for her political slush fund.
A common complaint is that this year’s candidates look small, like dots on the slopes of Mount Bloomberg.	The Editorial Board thinks that even though the crop of candidates are not billionaires, if we have to do with peons, we can accept Christine Quinn, because she's proven to have sold her soul to big business interests, which is the only thing that the Editorial Board cares about, frankly.
But that isn’t fair; all but a few are solid public servants running substantive campaigns.	The Editorial Board has to give lip service to the other candidates, so voters could fool themselves into thinking the editors might possibly consider a candidate other than Mayor Bloomberg's heir apparent.
Though the race was crashed, and distracted for a few irritating weeks, by the unqualified Anthony Weiner, it has since sobered up, and voters are paying attention.	The Editorial Board did its best to keep focusing on Anthony Weiner in a negative light, so that the editors could dispatch him as quickly as possible, so that the editors could focus on fluffing Christine Quinn's sagging campaign.
It is clear by now — and last Wednesday’s debate made it even clearer — that the best in the group is Christine Quinn.	The Editorial Board is trying to make this hard sell of Christine Quinn, so we will go to any lengths to push her campaign on voters.
Ms. Quinn, the City Council speaker, offers the judgment and record of achievement anyone should want in a mayor.	The Editorial Board believes that Christine Quinn has a corrupt enough record that she will nicely fit into the broken political system.
Two opponents — Bill de Blasio, the public advocate, and William Thompson Jr., former comptroller — offer powerful arguments on their own behalf.	The Editorial Board wants to give these two fools more lip service, yadda-yadda-yadda.
But Ms. Quinn inspires the most confidence that she would be the right mayor for the inevitable times when hope and idealism collide with the challenge of getting something done.	The Editorial Board believes that Christine Quinn will be a perfect puppet to her REBNY and PFNYC masters.
Ms. Quinn has been an impressive leader since her days as a neighborhood advocate and her early years on the City Council.	The Editorial Board believes that Christine Quinn has fully sold out and betrayed her activism roots by now. She's gotten that shit out of her system, and she is a complete "Yes Woman" to her campaign contributors and special interests.
We endorsed her for the Council in 1999 as someone “who can both work within the system and criticize it when necessary” — a judgment she has validated many times since.	The Editorial Board analyses this as meaning that Christine Quinn will do what she is told by big business, and she will continue to undermine democracy and shred the social safety net when instructed.
She has shepherded through important laws protecting New Yorkers’ health, safety and civil rights, including measures banning public smoking, protecting tenants and small businesses, and battling slumlords.	The Editorial Board wants to remind big business interests that Christine Quinn has a record of doing what Mayor Bloomberg told her to do.
She sponsored the sweeping 2007 legislation that made the city’s exemplary campaign-finance laws even stronger.	The Editorial Board is only telling you a half-truth here, because Christine Quinn also weakened campaign finance laws this very year to benefit outside groups being able to spend unlimited amounts of money to further corrupt political campaigns.
She pushed successfully for a state law making kindergarten mandatory for 5-year-olds — giving thousands of poor and minority children a better start on their educations.	The Editorial Board likes it when Christine Quinn focuses her campaign on childish issues, because that helps voters forget her betrayals on term limits and her corrupt record with slush funds.
As speaker, Ms. Quinn has been a forceful counterpart to Mr. Bloomberg, and has turned the Council from a collection of rambunctious, ill-directed egos into a forceful and effective legislative body.	The Editorial Board believes that Christine Quinn subjugated herself to Mayor Bloomberg, and she used her slush funds to reward and punish her political allies and enemies like a good political boss should do.
In wrestling with budgets she has shown restraint that runs counter to lesser political instincts.	The Editorial Board is most impressed that Christine Quinn was able to focus on a political agenda that favoured the 1%, even when it meant driving up poverty and homelessness in New York City during the Bloomberg-Quinn administration.
She fought, for example, for a Bloomberg plan to keep a year’s surplus as a rainy-day fund.	The Editorial Board liked that Christine Quinn didn't use surplus funds to fight poverty or homelessness.
There was fierce opposition from Council members who wanted to spend the money.	The Editorial Board congratulates Christine Quinn turned her back on the needy, especially LGBT homeless youth, which is not an easy thing to do, given her identity. Let's give her some credit for that !
Ms. Quinn was right, and the city had a cushion when the recession hit.	The Editorial Board is impressed that Christine Quinn found ways to prevent tax hikes on the 1%.
Mr. Bloomberg has raised expectations that hard decisions should be made on the merits — that the city needs a mayor who is willing to say no.	The Editorial Board is endorsing Christine Quinn in part because Mayor Bloomberg told us to, and plus we may need to be bought out by Mayor Bloomberg if the newspaper business keeps losing money.
More than with the other candidates, that description fits Ms. Quinn.	The Editorial Board believes that Christine Quinn is the most corrupt candidate, and the extremes that she will go to embrace corruption is why Mayor Bloomberg respects her so much, that's what he told the Editorial Board during our back room meeting.
As an early leader in the campaign, with a target on her back, she has faced anger and derision without wavering.	The Editorial Board has tried to keep extending political cover to Christine Quinn, so that she wouldn't suffer such a steep drop in the polls.
We admire her staunch support for the city’s solid-waste management plan, which is good for the whole city but bitterly opposed in some neighborhoods.	The Editorial Board picked this lousy issue to focus on, because the editors didn't want to touch the slush fund scandal.
She has been willing to challenge the mayor’s misjudgment and insensitivity, as when he tried to require single adults to prove their homelessness before they were allowed to use city shelters.	The Editorial Board mentions the only thing Christine Quinn has done to address a small part of the homeless problem, so that the editors could keep running the façade of a "liberal newspaper."
Mr. de Blasio has been the most forceful and eloquent of the Democrats in arguing that New York needs to reset its priorities in favor of the middle class, the struggling and the poor.	The there is no way that the Editorial Board could ever support a candidate that wants to help the poor.
His stature has grown as his message has taken root — voters leery of stark and growing inequalities have embraced his message of “two cities.”	The Editorial Board endorsed Christine Quinn so that we could shift the campaign conversation to be about identity politics, not about income inequality.
He has ennobled the campaign conversation by insisting, correctly, that expanding early education is vital to securing the city’s future.	The Editorial Board picked early education as an issue for Mr. de Blasio, because that's an issue that provides the editors with some political cover in the Christine Quinn endorsement.
And yet, Mr. de Blasio’s most ambitious plans — like a powerful new state-city partnership to make forever-failing city hospitals financially viable, or to pay for universal prekindergarten and after-school programs through a new tax on the richest New Yorkers — need support in the State Capitol, and look like legislative long shots.	The Editorial Board has brought back Anemona Hartocollis to continue to write shoddy and entirely biased reporting to undermine Mr. de Blasio's platform on saving community hospitals.
Once a Mayor de Blasio saw his boldest ideas smashed on the rocks of Albany, then what?	The Editorial Board was told by Mayor Bloomberg that he would pull strings with the state GOP politicians up in Albany to undermine any candidate other than Christine Quinn.
Mr. Thompson, meanwhile, who nearly defeated Mr. Bloomberg four years ago, has run a thoughtful campaign grounded on the insights he gained in important elective and appointed posts in New York City.	The Editorial Board can't take Bill Thompson seriously. His wife has taken millions in charitable donations from Mayor Bloomberg. There's no way that the Thompson family isn't already indebted to Mayor Bloomberg, even the editors would figure out this much.
A former president of the old Board of Education, Mr. Thompson argues that he is the best candidate to fix the city schools, but his close ties to the United Federation of Teachers, not always a friend of needed reforms, give us pause.	The Editorial Board was told by Mayor Bloomberg that the next item on our political agenda is to bust up the teachers' union.
The teachers’ union is one of the municipal unions itching for retroactive pay raises in contracts that expired under Mr. Bloomberg and need renegotiating.	The Editorial Board is going to start a campaign to deny the teachers' union any pay raise.
For all the growing testiness of the campaign, the Democrats share much common ground.	The Editorial Board believes that enough real estate and big business campaign donations have steered the Democratic candidates into adopting campaign platforms that embrace an ideology of neoliberalism.
All agree on equality, opportunity and fairness.	The Editorial Board doesn't give a shit about equality, opportunity and faireness -- except as it would apply to our dwindling list of advertisers.
They concede that the best of the Bloomberg years — the economic diversification and growth, the astounding drop in crime, the transit innovations, the greener and cleaner public spaces, and big plans for the future — must be preserved.	The Editorial Board wants a mayoral candidate that will continue Mayor Bloomberg's policies of gentrification, stop and frisk discrimination, higher transit fares for commuters, the sale of more parks for sports stadiums, and more zone-busting real estate development.
And they agree that the worst must be corrected — starting with the Police Department’s unconstitutional use of stop-and-frisk, which has abused and humiliated hundreds of thousands of innocent New Yorkers.	The Editorial Board believes that stop and frisk should be ended in the outer boroughs, but its use should continue in Manhattan, perhaps even increased.
Ms. Quinn has no specific plan to require the richest New Yorkers to pay more in taxes in service of important civic goals (she says she will raise taxes as a last resort), but neither has she made a long list of unrealistic promises.	The Editorial Board is happy to see that Christine Quinn will keep sparing the 1% from having to pay their fair share, and, even better, Christine Quinn isn't making any promises to the poor or working classes of New York City. If low-income New Yorkers can't afford to live in New York City, they can always move to New Jersey.
The biggest challenge has not been talked about much — next year the new mayor will have to confront a budget crisis with no money to spare and all those expired municipal contracts to settle.	The Editorial Board is salivating at the opportunity that Christine Quinn will have to bust up a few municipal unions.
The mayor we will need then will not be the police reformer or education visionary, but a skilled and realistic negotiator.	The Editorial Board doesn't want Christine Quinn to reform the police department. As stated, the editors prefer to continue stop and frisk discrimination and police brutality as a way to drive out undesireables from the five boroughs, or from Manhattan, at least.
Some positions Ms. Quinn has supported are unwise or objectionable.	The Editorial Board is thrilled that Christine Quinn so readily adopted neoliberal and racist policies without complaint.
She has been too strong in supporting Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, the architect and stoutest defender of stop-and-frisk.	The Editorial Board expects that Christine Quinn will expand the use of stop-and-frisk.
She has supported, too blindly, Mr. Kelly’s practice of spying on Muslims at prayer, a similar false choice of public safety over the Constitution.	The Editorial Board finds this kind of discrimination excusable, and notice how the editors didn't mention how the NYPD also menaces people of color and LGBTQ and gender non-conforming New Yorkers. Basically, the editors don't care about civil rights and civil liberties violations.
She can become mumbly when talking about things that the real estate industry opposes, like changing zoning laws to require construction of affordable apartments.	The Editorial Board likes that Christine Quinn won't bite the hand that feeds her.
She has a reputation for shouting, but has shown a capacity to listen, and to be persuaded to change her mind — attributes we will count on seeing more of if she is elected.	The Editorial Board is already receiving estimates and bids for the installation of sound proofing in Gracie Mansion.
We had already made up our own minds in favor of Ms. Quinn, but the Wednesday debate would have clinched it anyway.	For years, the Editorial Board has been instructing reporters to write their articles from a point of view of bias that fluff's Christine Quinn's image and her campaign.
Candidates were asked what legacy they wanted to leave after two terms.	The Editorial Board has arranged it for fix to be in so that Christine Quinn can serve two terms as mayor.
“More people in the middle class,” Ms. Quinn said.	The Editorial Board helped Christine Quinn with this lip service.
It was a perfect answer, and she could have left it there.	The Editorial Board told Christine Quinn to shut her mouth and not ruin her interview with the editors.
But, Quinn being Quinn, she threw in supporting details.	But being the big mouth that she is, Christine Quinn went on tawking and tawkig and tasking, so much so that many editors put on their earphones and started listening to the latest Lady Gaga song on their iPhones.
She wants 40,000 more apartments the middle class can afford to live in.	The Editorial Board did hear that Christine Quinn has a plan to help funnel tax breaks and low-cost loans to developers, so that taxpayers could subsidize real estate profits to some of her campaign donors.
She wants to repair crumbling public housing, providing “quality conditions” for 600,000 people.	The Editorial Board promised to help support Christine Quinn carry out Mayor Bloomberg's plan to allow the development of luxury high rises on the last little bit of open space in NYCHA housing projects.
She wants to make the school day longer and replace textbooks with electronic tablets.	The Editorial Board also liked what it heard when Christine Quinn said that she wants to outsource teachers to a series of computer learning modules in 45 minute segments.
At the buzzer, she threw in: make the city “climate-change ready.”	The Editorial Board is looking forward to finding out how Christine Quinn has funnel more tax dollars to real estate developers that keep wanting to build along the rivers and beaches of the five boroughs. The editors view this as a risky proposition, but Christine Quinn seems to be obsessed with making more and more back room deals with real estate developers. The editors want to see how much she can get away with.
A lot of good ideas that, in Ms. Quinn’s case, add up to an achievable vision, and one we would be glad to see come to pass.	The Editorial Board is going to help Christine Quinn win by running more fluff pieces about her new luxury condo, her week-end home, her cooking skills, her favourite café, and her love of animals.

Who's Been "Moving On Up" During the Bloomberg-Quinn Era ?

A new video posted on YouTube takes a satirical look of New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s political record. The video is set to a Karaoke recording of ''Moving On Up'' -- the famous theme song from the hit sitcom, The Jeffersons, and the video uses sarcasm when Speaker Quinn denies some of the most controversial political choices she’s made.

Among the issues addressed in this short video are :

• the $30,000 in campaign contributions Speaker Quinn accepted from Rudin Management Company, which basically foreclosed on St. Vincent’s Hospital ;
• Speaker Quinn’s controversial support for police commissioner Ray Kelly, who oversaw a culture of racism and brutality at the NYPD ;
• Speaker Quinn’s controversial use of fictitious accounts to hide her political slush fund ; and
• the ever-changing rationale for extending term limits.

Christine Quinn Shirley Huntley Ruben Wills Connection

One of the publicly-elected officials, who State Sen. Shirley Huntley was asked to wiretap and photograph by the FBI, was Queens Councilmember Ruben Wills, according to Politicker.

New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn endorsed Council Member Ruben Wills for re-election in 2011, one day after he appeared in court to face a misdemeanor stealing charge. Councilmember Wills won a special election in southeast Queens in 2010 to succeed Thomas White, who died in August in 2010, and he was re-elected in 2011 continue to serve the remainder of White’s four-year term. Wills appeared in court in March 2011 on charges in connection with a 1996 incident. He’s accused of damaging a wall and removing a fan and track lighting at a downtown business. (The Wall Street Journal)

After his March 2011 court appearance, Speaker Quinn defended Councilmember Wills. "I'm extraordinarily proud of my City Council and proud of the members that I get to serve with every day on behalf of the people of the City of New York," she told The Daily News.

Speaker Quinn awarded Councilmember Wills $584,000 in discretionary funding in 2012. (The New York Daily News)

Shirley Huntley Reveals Lawmakers She Secretly Recorded ; Jose Peralta Amongst Them

In federal court filing, Shirley Huntley reveals New York lawmakers she secretly recorded. nyti.ms/11jEA57 twitter.com/intelligencer/…

— Daily Intelligencer (@intelligencer) May 8, 2013

“@nypost: 6 state senators, city councilman among those secretly taped by Shirley Huntley in corruption sting nyp.st/11TbTa6”

— Sheri Van Fossen (@sherivf) May 8, 2013

2013 05 08 Shirley Huntley Jose Peralta Wiretapping by Connaissable

The Wrath of Quinn : Endorse Her Or Else No Slush Funds For You !

City Council Members Fear Budget Revenge if They Don't Endorse Quinn

From DNA Info :

Many City Council members are wary of endorsing candidates in the 2013 mayoral race until after budget season because they're afraid a vengeful Speaker Christine Quinn will cut their share of $50 million in discretionary funds, DNAinfo.com New York has learned.

The funds, which are controlled by the speaker, are dished out to members each summer to fund constituent-pleasing services, such as community centers and seniors programs. While Quinn’s office has long insisted that the money is allocated based on districts' needs, it’s no secret that members on Quinn’s good side tend to profit — while those who cross her get their budgets slashed.

And many Council members now worry that endorsing a rival in the mayor's race, where Quinn is widely perceived as the front-runner, will result in the same fate.

“I definitely think that discretionary funds will be wielded as a weapon in the fight for endorsements,” said one Democratic Council member, who, like nearly a dozen others who spoke to DNAinfo.com New York, asked for anonymity to avoid angering Quinn.

“Certainly, that is the elephant in the room,” another member said.

“It’s a legal form of blackmail," still another member said.

To avoid retribution, some Council members are weighing postponing their endorsements until July, after the budget is adopted and Quinn no longer has sway over the money.

See also : Endorse Quinn - or else ! (via Queens Crap)

Christine Quinn - Headline Clippings Media Kit

Christine Quinn - In The Headlines - Newspaper Political Coverage Summary

Christine Quinn Mini-Me

Christine Quinn Uses City Council Funds (aka Taxpayer Money) to Reward Political Bosses

After City Council Speaker Christine Quinn got fluffed by NYTimes reporter David W. Chen, now comes Michael Powell, a columnist for the Gray Lady, who pulls back the curtain on Speaker Quinn's slush fund-tinged campaign for mayor.

Mr. Powell reports that Ms. Quinn was appointed Speaker of the City Council after she "charmed" political bosses from Queens, the Bronx, and Brooklyn. At her coronation ceremony, she put Vito Lopez, the notorious Brooklyn political boss (who is the target of several ethical and corruption investigations) in the front row. Speaker Quinn has also scratched Mr. Vito's back in exchange for his political support. "The fates have smiled on Mr. Lopez’s social-service empire, the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council ; this year the Council sent more than $4 million its way," reported the NYTimes.

In a statement posted Facebook, a government integrity watchdog activist questioned why the latest NYTimes article stops short of probing the status of the federal investigation into Speaker Quinn's slush fund scandal.

"Instead of reporting on Quinn's criminal activity, the NY Times merely raises questions about her ethics and leadership: "But there are questions to be asked about her leadership, and not all cheery." Is it a fear of Bloomberg that prevents the Times from reporting on the well-documented budget and campaign corruption ?" Donny Moss posted on the social network.

This is how the NYTimes article ends :

Last year, a Council majority favored mandatory sick days for New Yorkers with less than a week of vacation. The mayor opposed it. Ms. Quinn killed it.

Some suggest that she has gotten lost in the game, that she can no longer recall the questions she once asked as an advocate. That sounds too definitive. Her arc is not done.

She affects nonchalance when described as a mayoral puppet: “You can call me Mini-Me. I don’t really care.”

The rub is that voters might care a lot.

Do Something About Marriage Equality

Op-Ed : Hold Speaker Quinn Accountable For Lack Of Marriage Equality In New York City

Over the last year, a prominent campaign was announced, encouraging ''... LGBT Americans and straight allies to withhold time and money from political entities that are not fighting as hard for our equality ... .''

''Democrats and Republicans are holding our equality hostage -– promising progress if we vote them back into office year after year, but never actually delivering on those promises. It’s time for us to call them on their game of chicken. We are insisting on progress before we will prop up political parties and committees that expect us to donate while they fund anti-equality candidates and fail us time after time.'' This includes, New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who is presumed to be aggressively raising money and support in preparation to mount a 2013 campaign for New York City's mayoral office.

On 13 January 2011, Speaker Quinn attended an event sponsored by Freedom To Marry, a national marriage equality organisation. Speaker Christine Quinn shows up to gay rights events -- or gay engagement announcements, like the one that took place on the evening that this YouTube was made -- but Speaker Quinn has never introduced any law to establish marriage equality in New York City. In contrast, Gavin Newson helped to reshape marriage equality for the United States by allowing same-sex couples to receive marriage licenses in San Francisco. New York voters need to hold Speaker Quinn accountable for having taken no action during all her years as Speaker to make marriage equality a reality.

At a time when, if we expect to make real progress in terms of gay civil rights, we need ''All Hands On Deck,'' here we find that, instead, Speaker Quinn still has her hands in the cookie jar. If gay marriage ever becomes legal in New York City, it won't be because of Speaker Quinn.