Scott Stringer Takes on the NYPD's Racist Stop-and-Frisk Policing

Last we week, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer continued to make Manhattan residents proud as he accelerated his emergence as the clearest and loudest voice amongst elected officials opposing the brutal racism of the policing approach used in New York City.

Stringer in September

In September of  this year, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer took a stand against Mayor Bloomberg's stop-and-frisk policies. He highlighted that over 600,000 NYC residents were stopped last year and that we're on a pace to exceed that number and set a new record this year. With nearly all of those stopped being young men of color, Stringer felt compelled to try to end the practice.

Stringer could not have been more accurate in saying, "We cannot wait a minute longer to have an honest examination of stop-and-frisk and the collateral damage it inflicts on our city every day."

He was also accurate in September when he called on Mayor Bloomberg and the NYPD to create an expert panel to help the NYPD establish new strategies for law enforcement that are not based on race or skin color and that will reduce the number of stop-and-frisk incidents and "achieve the right balance between policing and civil rights.”

While we at Manhattan Viewpoint, the NYCLU, and many other groups have criticized the NYPD's racist stop-and-frisk policing policies, Borough President Stringer is the first top-tier prospective candidate for NYC Mayor in 2013 to aggressively and publicly embrace the need to end the stop-and-frisk nightmare. NYC Public Advocate Bill De Blasio has expressed a quieter level opposition to stop-and-frisk. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn's support of the racist practice should disqualify her as a potential future Mayor. Thus far, Stringer stands alone as a genuine advocate for ending the racist practice.

Stringer in October

Last week, only a day before a major Harlem protest of the NYPD's stop-and-frisk policies that featured Cornel West, Borough President Stringer once again raised his voice to loudly and clearly demand that the Mayor join the rest of us in the 21st Century and end the practice of using skin color as a proxy for criminality.

Stringer wrote a compelling opinion piece in the New York Daily News that provided a superb description of the flaws in the current race-based approach and provided a sincere and tested solution.

Yesterday, I joined with state State Senator Eric Adams in calling for a federal investigation into current stop-and-frisk practices. In 2000, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights concluded that the NYPD street-stop program amounted to racial profiling. Eleven years and millions of stops later, the city is still waiting for a street-stop policy that is designed to identify true threats.

As a federal court in Manhattan found last month, serious questions remain about racial disparities in current stop-and-frisk practices; about the constitutionality of stops that do not result in arrest and about the role quotas may have played in driving the fourfold increase in stops over the past decade. A new investigation that focuses on each of these issues would help to answer these questions and chart a road map for reform.

What we know already about stop-and-frisk should give us all pause. This year, the NYPD is on track to stop 700,000 New Yorkers. And yet in 93% of all stops last year, police could find no reason to make an arrest.

The police say stop-and-frisk is an important strategy for getting guns off the street, a priority that must remain paramount. But in fact, guns are recovered in only 0.2% of the cases, a success rate that would be judged a failure if applied to any other government program.

Lastly, 85% of those stopped last year were black or Latino. Some counter that the high proportion of stops in communities of color merely reflects the ethnic makeup of high-crime neighborhoods, but the numbers tell a different story. NYPD data show that among those stopped, whites, blacks and Latinos are actually arrested in equal proportion, about 7% of the time.

What stop-and-frisk is reaping is not so much guns, but a deep layer of distrust between police and the city's black and Latino neighborhoods, and that makes solving crime harder, not easier.

We should not wait for the results of a federal investigation to implement immediate reforms. Last month, at a forum at Riverside Church, I offered a blueprint for improving stop-and-frisk, not ending it.

We should pilot our own version of "Operation Ceasefire," a community-based policing strategy now employed by some 70 cities. By joining together the police and district attorneys with social services that offer jobs and other paths off the streets, this approach slashed homicide rates in Chicago and Boston by double digits.

We should train officers to make street stops more constitutional and less confrontational. The Fourth Amendment has been interpreted clearly: An officer can make a stop only when he has reasonable suspicion that an individual is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime. Even then, the officer may frisk a subject only when he reasonably suspects that he is in danger of physical injury. That's not what is happening on the streets of New York today.

Lastly, we should hold precinct commanders accountable for the proper execution of stops-and-frisks.

The day we do all that, New York will be a better, safer place for all of us.

Bloomberg Cuts Budgets of Critics and Rivals

Mayor Bloomberg, who gave his own advisors retroactive pay raises, has proposed drastic budget cuts for the other major elected officials in NYC.

Retroactive Raises for Bloomberg Advisors

Mayor Bloomberg quietly provided two years of retroactive pay raises (essentially huge bonuses plus major pay raises) to 7,000 members of his staff in 2009. He made this generous donation to the checkbooks of his advisors during the biggest budget crisis in decades in NYC and during the deepest recession in our country since the Great Depression.

The arrogance was astonishing because he was simultaneously raising sales taxes. His advisors were getting huge bonuses and raises that were paid for by the purchases of poor New Yorkers enduring a regressive tax. Bloomberg refused to raise income taxes (which could have been structured in a progressive manner) while embracing regressive taxation.

As the Mayor proposes layoffs for teachers in NYC and cuts services for our residents, he hasn't asked his own advisors to participate in the pain.

Bloomberg has worked hard to maintain an administration essentially devoid of people of color. He has a smaller percentage of people of color in his administration than even Mayor Giuliani (with all of his venom racist rhetoric and behavior) had. Giuliani refused to meet with any Black elected officials during his time as Mayor, but he had more people of color in his administration than Bloomberg has.

Bloomberg's non-diverse administration has kept its raises and bonuses while everyone else is cut.

Unfair Cuts

Unfairly, Bloomberg has proposed cutting the budgets of the five Borough Presidents and the Public Advocate by up to 36%.

Bloomberg is ensuring that his critics and rivals are crippled by a lack of resources, and he is also sending a message to all elected officials in New York City that he will slash their budgets if they don't support his agenda.

Bloomberg has taken advantage of his power in this way previously. In 2010, Bloomberg took $1mm away from the Borough Presidents without warning, leaving those elected officials scrambling to fill sudden budget gaps in their offices.

Bloomberg Without Checks or Balances

Because Mayor Bloombeg operates without checks and balances, and because he refuses to treat New York City residents fairly, Bloomberg has been able to exclude nearly all people of color from his administration, provide huge raises for his advisors while cutting resources throughout the rest of the government, and abuse other elected officials through the budget process. His arrogant emperor-mindset has never been acceptable, and it is getting worse.

Scott Stringer's Food Fight For Manhattan

On this Presidents' Day, we see that our local President, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, is once again the leading voice on a crucial local issue that has been overlooked by many others. This time the topic is Food.

Earlier this month, Stringer took his Food Fight to the next level by publishing his information-rich Food in the Public Interest report. http://mbpo.org/uploads/foodinthepublicinterest.pdf The report addresses the importance of food as a driver of the health of our fellow residents, and it looks carefully at our local agricultural community, its relevance, and mechanisms for protecting and strengthening the agricultural activity in and around New York City. The report also discusses hunger prevention in our city, which is particularly relevant during this period of economic stress and high unemployment. We applaud each element of the report, and we highlight for you the connection between the food that we consume as NYC residents and the quality of health we enjoy as a result.

Fat City

New York City has already shown leadership in its ban on transfats in our restaurants and in its 2008 establishment of the requirement that all restaurants with at least 15 locations nationwide post the calories contained in each item on their menus. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/nyregion/17calorie.html Yet, it seems that much more must be done. We are starting this food fight with the trends working against us. The rate of obesity and the rate of diabetes each increased 17% between 2002 and 2004 according to Stringer's Food Report.

Manhattan Borough President Stringer's report also alerts us that, amazingly, most of New York City's adults are overweight or obese http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/survey/survey-2005obesity.pdf, and that a direct correlation has been demonstrated between the parts of New York City with the lowest levels of consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables and the parts of our city that have the highest levels of obesity. Unfortunately, Upper Manhattan is near the top of the list of the areas affected by both the lack of consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables and the abundance of obesity. As stated in the Borough President's report, one in six restaurants in Central Harlem and East Harlem serves fast food, while the number is only one in twenty-five restaurants on the Upper East Side. Upper Manhattan is in desperate need of greater availability of high quality fresh food, and our local Community Boards can use their land use approval authority to encourage such greater availability.

We caution our fellow New Yorkers to remember that weight is not always a good proxy for physical health. Men and women in excellent physical condition with an abundance of muscle and very low levels of fat will often be deemed overweight or even obese based on government guidelines. http://www.consumerfreedom.com/pressrelease_detail.cfm?release=86 Will Smith and Andy Roddick would be considered overweight, and Sly Stallone and Mel Gibson would be considered obese under the current government definitions. http://www.bmiscale.com/ Each of those four celebrities should be envied in terms of their apparent physical health, but the government guidelines use only height and weight for the overweight and obese labels. Individuals with large amounts of muscle don't fit well into the guidelines.

With that caution stated, it is clear that we need to improve the overall health in all communities within NYC. Upper Manhattan includes many of the neighborhoods in our city that need the most attention and have the most work to do to achieve better health.

Recommendations

Nutrition education is a key component of overcoming the negative health trends that are affecting our city's residents. Borough President Stringer makes a number of innovative and thought-provoking recommendations in his report. The recommendations range from local actions to national policies. Amongst them:

(1) Encourage the consumption of healthy food in place of junk food
• Encourage New York City government agencies to continue reducing the amount of unhealthy and processed food served
• Encourage private and nonprofit entities to replace junk food with healthy options through grants, tenant improvement funds, tax breaks, access to low interest loans, or applicable licenses and permit processes
(2) Expand nutrition education campaigns through public service announcements, subway advertisements, etc.
(3) Develop an ongoing collaboration between nutrition experts and the city’s education and youth agencies to improve nutrition education in public schools and after-school programs
(4) Advocate for an increase in the per pupil federal reimbursement rate for school meals, which would allow for upgrades to school kitchens, improved training for staff, and the purchase of healthier unprocessed ingredients
(5) Encourage employers to promote nutrition education and healthy eating practices in the workplace by creating an online clearinghouse of information to assist employers with implementing worksite health and wellness policies
(6) Offer incentives through private insurance, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, Medicaid, and Medicare, for healthy weight and lifestyles, such as coverage for gym memberships and counseling for obesity

Manhattan Needs a Borough President

The NY Post says that we don't need a Borough President. http://www.nypost.com/seven/07222008/postopinion/editorials/nix_the_beeps_120969.htm Please allow me to tell you why they are wrong.

Protecting Our Homes and Strengthening Our Neighborhoods

We need a Borough President to stand with those who have made Manhattan (particularly Upper Manhattan) such an increasingly popular place to live. Manhattan is the most important county in the world. The world comes here to solve its political problems at the UN. The world comes here to perform on Broadway, at Radio City Music Hall and Carnegie Hall. Manhattan is the capital of the arts and the capital of culture for the world. Manhattan is the capital of the capital markets, commerce, and international trade. But, for so many of us, it is, first and foremost, the place where we live, the place where we have lived for so many years, and the place we want to continue to call, "home".

During many difficult years, Manhattanites, including many of modest means, built their neighborhoods into the types of locations that now attract the most privileged and powerful individuals from all over the world. As the privileged and the powerful seek to make their homes in portions of Manhattan that had not attracted such people until recently, many people of modest means are put at risk of losing their homes.

A Borough President can use the considerable power of that office to influence the path of real estate development in Manhattan and ensure that neighborhoods are maintained. New affordable housing can be demanded as part of development projects, and existing examples of high quality affordable housing can be protected from gentrification. Nearly every development project in Manhattan ends up facing scrutiny by the office of the Borough President. When the Borough President makes strengthening our neighborhoods his or her priority goal, the developers will work to strengthen neighborhoods in order to streamline their path to development and profit. The Borough President needs to have the right instincts for working with for-profit developers in order to trade their opportunity to generate a meaningful profit for the opportunity for our neighborhoods to remain whole and for our neighbors to be able to enjoy the benefits of development (e.g., improved governmental and private sector services, increased entertainment and dining options) rather than becoming victims of development.

Looking Out for The Interests of the Borough

Whether it is the World Trade Center site, the MTA Rail Yards, waterfront projects, or Upper Manhattan development for big-box retail, the people of the Borough of Manhattan should have a say in the outcome of the project. We live here. At the World Trade Center site, the Governor of New Jersey can block plans that are agreed by representatives of NYC and NY State. New Jersey's residents get a voice at the table. We need to ensure that the voice of those who live in Manhattan is heard. Manhattan is a county (New York County), and it is important that our county be represented by an executive in the public sector who puts our interests first. Beyond land use and housing, the Borough President's voice on health, education, job creation and a host of other key issues speaks loudly and clearly for all Manhattanites. The NY Post would like to silence that voice in order to have fewer places to turn when their allies seek to overcome the will of the people of Manhattan. They don't want an advocate for the people to interfere with any plans that they create to gain power or to obtain profit. We need to ensure that we have a strengthened Borough Presidency to stand against those who work against the interests of the residents of our great Borough.

Ensuring that City Services are Delivered

As the chair of the Borough Services Cabinet, the Borough President works to make city services more responsive to community needs. He or she meets monthly with those who are responsible for delivering services to Manhattan's residents and ensure that progress is being made to improve delivery and prevent service delivery problems.

Appointing Qualified Individuals to Boards and Commissions

Under the Charter, the Borough President appoints individuals to the following:

• A member of the City Planning Commission A member of the Economic Development Corporation Board
• A parent to the Public Education Panel and two members to the New York City Community and City-Wide Education Council
• 600 members of Manhattan's 12 Community Boards; half on nominations from City Council members
• Three members to sit on the Hudson River Park Trust Board Members to advisory boards of Manhattan's municipal health facilities
• Thirty-five additional municipal advisory and tasks forces

Other important roles of the Borough President:

• Sits on the New York City Off-Track Betting Site Selection Board when the board is considering matters pertinent to OTB locations within the borough
• Serves as a Trustee to the New York City Employee's Retirement System

How should the Borough Presidency Be Expanded?

In order to look after the interests of the people of Manhattan, the Borough President should have the power to appoint:

• Members to the Board of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation
• Some of the members of the Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone Board
• Some of the members of the NYC Economic Development Corporation Board
• Special ambassadors to represent the interests of the people of Manhattan to the Empire State Development Corporation

The NY Post Is Very Wrong

We need the Borough Presidency to remain in place and to be strengthened. Perhaps the other NYC newspapers will advocate for the people of Manhattan to have their voice heard as the NY Post attempts to silence our voices.