Council Votes, 29 to 22, to Extend Term Limits By Sewell Chan and Jonathan P. Hicks- City Room Blog - NYTimes.com

Read original...

“This is a defining moment, a game-changing moment,” Councilwoman Letitia James of Brooklyn said as she voted no on the bill to extend term limits. (Photos: James Estrin/The New York Times)

After a spirited, emotional and at times raucous debate, the City Council voted, 29 to 22, on Thursday afternoon to extend term limits, allow Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg to seek re-election next year and undo the result of two voter referendums that had imposed a limit of two four-year terms. (Please refresh this post for latest updates.)

The vote was a major victory for Mayor Bloomberg — a billionaire and lifelong Democrat who was elected mayor as a Republican in 2001, won re-election in 2005 and decided just weeks ago that he wished to seek a third term in 2009 — and for the Council’s speaker, Christine C. Quinn, but the intense acrimony surrounding the decision could come at great cost.

After Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, who presides over the Council, announced the final result, the balcony erupted in shouts of “The city’s for sale!” and “Shame on you!”

Earlier, at 3:22 p.m. the Council rejected, 28 to 22, a key amendment that would have called for a public referendum on term limits by summoning a Charter Revision Commission, which would schedule a special election. One member, James Sanders Jr. of Queens, abstained on the amendment. (See the end of this article for the full roll call.)

As Ms. Gotbaum announced the final vote count on the amendment, groans erupted from the balcony, which was packed with members of the public opposed to extending term limits without a public vote. The Council immediately turned its attention to the main bill, which would extend the limit to three terms from two.

Councilman Bill de Blasio of Brooklyn, who supported the amendment, warned his colleagues that the Council’s legitimacy would be forever tarnished.

“The people of the city will long remember what we have done here today, and the people will be unforgiving,” Mr. de Blasio said. “We are stealing like a thief in the night their right to shape our democracy.”

Councilman David Yassky of Brooklyn, one of the members who introduced the amendment, announced that despite its defeat, he would vote for the underlying bill. He said that term limits were bad public policy and that a limit of 12 years, instead of 8, would help strengthen future lawmakers in the face of strong mayors.

Councilwoman Letitia James of Brooklyn adamantly disagreed. “The city of New York has never, ever in the history of our nation postponed a transfer of power, regardless of the circumstances,” she said, quoting an editorial from The New York Times in 2001, when Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani sought to extend his term by three months in the aftermath of 9/11.

“My constituency wants the opportunity to vote for this,” and if they do not have that opportunity, “they want me to vote no,” Councilwoman Rosie Mendez of Manhattan said.

Councilman Tony Avella of Queens called the term limits bill “an absolute disgrace,” and warned sternly, “You’re not conning anybody. The public of this city knows that the fix was in from the beginning.”

He added, “You should all be voted out of office for voting for this. Vote this down!”

Councilman Domenic M. Recchia Jr. of Brooklyn urged his colleagues to extend term limits, citing the economic crisis. He paraphrased Abraham Lincoln, who ran for re-election in 1864 during the Civil War, as saying, “When crossing a river you don’t swap horses halfway.”

Councilman Lewis A. Fidler of Brooklyn said he would vote to extend term limits because he had always believed they were a bad idea. “I’m pleased that the billionaires have finally come around to my point of view,” he said to laughter, adding that he did not care about any of the three billionaires who have inserted themselves into the debate: Mayor Bloomberg, Ronald S. Lauder and Tom Golisano.

Councilman G. Oliver Koppell of the Bronx said the Council was acting within its full authority to amend the City Charter, which was amended in 1993 by a voter initiative that imposed a two-term limit.

“The charter can be amended in different ways for different things,” Mr. Koppell said. “We’re acting within the rules.”

Councilman John C. Liu of Queens denounced what he called the “arrogance” of Mayor Bloomberg, who promised Mr. Lauder that he would convene a Charter Revision Commission in 2010 to revisit the issue of term limits. Such a commission should be convened next year instead, he said.

Councilman Eric N. Gioia of Queens urged his colleagues to preserve the existing term limits, saying, “It’s no wonder that people no longer trust politics or politicians.”

Councilman Alan J. Gerson of Manhattan, one of the three authors of the amendment, drew hisses from the balcony when he announced he would support the underlying bill:

The possibility of a referendum is now impossible — unfortunately, in my opinion. We are therefore left with two stark alternatives: either we decide not to extend term limits, or we decide to extend term limits. The same democratic principles which led me to support a referendum compels me, under this choice before us, to vote yes on this bill.

While a public vote would have been preferable, Mr. Gerson said, “it would set a terrible precedent to raise a referendum result to the level of absolute constitutional principle.” He said New Yorkers deserved to have “a debate” about the merits of continuity in leadership.

As the final roll call got underway at 4 p.m., Councilman Charles Barron, a firebrand on the Council, attacked Mr. Recchia by name, saying, “We’ve got to prioritize the will of the people over the fish of your aquarium,” a reference to the New York Aquarium, which is in Mr. Recchia’s southern Brooklyn district and has received city financing. Mr. Barron told Councilman Leroy G. Comrie Jr., who earlier had quoted Thomas Jefferson. “If you’re gong to quote somebody, don’t quote Jefferson, a slave-holding pedophile,” Mr. Barron thundered.

Councilman Charles Barron of Brooklyn denounced the effort to change term limits without a public referendum.

Mr. Barron concluded, “Even though the mayor will win today, he is the big loser, because he lost democracy, he lost the favor of the people.”

Councilwoman Gale A. Brewer of Manhattan said she was in an “ethical bind” and said she felt she was open to “accusations of hypocrisy.” She decided to vote no on extending term limits.

“This is a defining moment, a game-changing moment, that marks not the end of a process, but the beginning of a process,” Ms. James said as she cast her dissenting vote.

“If my constituents are not satisfied with the work I’ve done on the City Council, they will vote me out,” Councilman Miguel Martinez of Manhattan said as he voted yes.

“Yes, we will!” came a cry from the balcony, as Ms. Gotbaum banged for gavel, calling for order.

Similarly, as Councilman James Vacca of the Bronx announced that he was voting yes, a voice from the balcony cried out, “Sell-out!”

Councilman Thomas White Jr. of Queens was in an unusual position: He was forced out by term limits after the 2001 elections but came back to the Council after defeating his successor, Allan W. Jennings Jr., who was censured by the Council for sexually harassing subordinates.

Mr. Yassky tried to preserve his image as a reformer. “I don’t think that the throw-the-bums-out policy that is embodied in term limits and in Ron Lauder’s campaign to maintain it is reform,” Mr. Yassky said before voting yes.

Councilman James S. Oddo, the leader of the three-member Republican minority on the 51-member Council, said jokingly that he was hesitant about giving a speech because “I’ve had enough YouTube exposure for two lifetimes.” (A video of Mr. Oddo cursing loudly at a Borat-style prankster was widely circulated on YouTube.)

Mr. Oddo warned, “When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.” He voted no.

The Council meeting began at 2:22 p.m., nearly an hour late, and began with a speech from the Council speaker, Christine C. Quinn.

“This is a difficult vote in very difficult times,” she said. Reiterating arguments she made hours earlier, at a news conference, Ms. Quinn argued that continuity of leadership was essential, saying the city faces its gravest crisis since the Depression.

She added:

Make no mistake: I believe that our great city will get through these challenges and emerge stronger than ever before. I also believe that in challenging times like these, the voters should have the choice — the choice to continue their current leadership. They should have the right to vote for the current mayor, or a new one, for their current City Council member, or a new one. That is exactly what is at stake today.

When Ms. Quinn said it was “ludicrous” for critics to suggest the bill was the product of a “back-room deal,” a chorus of boos and jeers erupted from the balcony. Ms. Quinn said the bill had been the subject of vigorous discussion, including “two, well-attended public hearings, 20 hours of public hearings and a vigorous debate.”

“Support for this bill is broad and deep,” she said, citing union officials and former elected officials like Gov. Mario M. Cuomo and Mayor Edward I. Koch.

“From Floyd Flake to Felix Rohatyn, the brightest minds with the deepest understanding of the crisis this impact could have in our neighborhoods have come forward in support of extending term limits from two terms to three,” she said.

In one year, she said, “voters will have the right to re-elect us, or defeat us, in the voting booth.”

“The debate today is an important one, but ultimately it is a debate about process,” she said, adding, “By passing this bill, we are increasing voter choice.”

She added, “None of us are arrogant enough to believe we are indispensable. But we are confident enough and secure enough in our ability to help this city we love that we are willing to stand before voters on Election Day and ask them to re-elect us.”

Ms. Quinn tried to preempt criticism that the bill represents “a deal between billionaires, with no one else having a say,” by arguing that she and other supporters of the bill are far from billionaires.

Mr. Yassky, of Brooklyn, spoke next. He rose and proposed an amendment that would require a public referendum on term limits, by convening a Charter Revision Commission. He said the commission could call a special election on term limits for early next year.

Mr. Yassky said he opposed term limits but that the Council’s legitimacy as a democratic body was at stake. “Voters have approved term limits twice, including once when they specifically chose to keep the two-term limit rather than go to three terms. For us to reject those votes and those voters will, without question, make New Yorkers more cynical about politics,” he said.

Mr. Yassky cited a Quinnipiac University poll showing that 89 percent of voters supported a referendum. “That should tell you that a referendum is the right way to go,” he said, to scattered applause from the balcony.

“The only serious objection I have heard to a referendum is that it might lose,” he said. Mr. Yassky said that with an “extraordinarily popular mayor,” newspaper editorial pages and lawmakers on its side, a measure to extend term limits would pass a popular vote.

Mr. de Blasio agreed. “By voting yes on the amendment, we are saying to the people of New York City that we respect what they require of us as public servants,” he said.

Councilman Charles Barron, a Brooklyn Democrat, assailed Ms. Quinn’s logic. “If we are talking about a direct democracy, where the people rule, and a representative democracy, where those who represent the people come to vote — if you do this, you’re undermining the very people who vote you in to represent them, because their voices were already heard,” he said.

Mr. Barron, a fiery critic of Ms. Quinn and Mr. Bloomberg, added, “The bottom line: Mayor Bloomberg has not been the best person to run this city. It was under this watch we got into this economic mess. He came in worth $5 billion. He’s now worth $20 billion. And he comes to this Council wanting to cut the budget.”

Mr. Barron noted that voters in Venezuela in 2007 rejected a proposal by President Hugo Chavez that would have allowed him to run for re-election indefinitely. “Mayor Bloomberg, be like Hugo, and let the people decide,” Mr. Barron said.

“I personally am against term limits, but I am against a process that doesn’t go back to the voters,” said Councilman David I. Weprin of Queens.

Councilman Alan J. Gerson of Manhattan said, “We are left with selecting among alternatives which each have significant flaws,” and called it “a difficult, wrenching decision.” He noted that the amendment was structured so that if a special election could not be held early enough for next year’s election cycle, the Council could revisit the issue.

Councilman Lewis A. Fidler, a Brooklyn Democrat, called the amendment “a cure that’s worse than the disease.” Because of the need for a Justice Department voting rights review and the time to convene a Charter Revision Commission, Mr. Fidler said, there was little realistic chance that a special election could be held before nominating petitions will be circulated in June for the November 2009 election.

Council members Letitia James and Vincent J. Gentile of Brooklyn argued that extending term limits would damage the body’s legitimacy. “From the very beginning, the process has been the problem,” Mr. Gentile said. “The amendment will let the public know that their voices are being heard as clearly as ever.”

Councilman Robert Jackson of Manhattan said he had always been an implacable opponent of term limits. “Let’s have a backbone,” he said, saying his colleagues had been elected to represent their constituents.

Councilman Anthony Como of Queens said it would cost $15 million to hold a special election “and we know what the answer is going to be.” Mr. Como urged his colleagues to vote no on both the amendment and the underlying bill.

Councilwoman Rosie Mendez of Manhattan disagreed. “It doesn’t matter if the cost is $5 million, $15 million or $15 billion,” she said. “The people have a right to vote.” Council members Annabel Palma of the Bronx and Vincent M. Ignizio of Staten Island said they agreed.

Councilman John C. Liu, of Queens, said he opposed term limits, but argued that to abolish them without a popular vote would foster cynicism. “Term limits were not enacted in New York City as the result of a rich man’s ad campaign, as has been suggested, but were born out of a deep cynicism for politics, for elected officials, not only here in New York City, but all across America,” he said.

Councilman Tony Avella of Queens gave a stirring speech:

The people voted twice for term limits. Their message could not have been clearer. for this body to overturn that without going back to the people is undemocratic and disgraceful. There is no excuse for this. Pass the amendment. Put it back to the people. Anything less than that just goes to the heart of what people say about politicians. Do you want to be remembered as the politicians who voted to ignore the will of the people?

Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito and Councilman Eric N. Gioia both said the amendment would give people a voice.

Earlier, as members took their red leather seats, throngs of journalists were assembled on both sides of the Council’s dais. The Council’s sergeants-at-arms restricted access to the main floor of the chamber to lawmakers, their staffs and the press; ordinary members of the public were directed to the balcony, which was standing-room-only.

But many people who tried to enter the chamber were turned away by the Council’s sergeant at arms staff.

One was Gene Russianoff, the senior attorney with the New York Public Interest Research Group, a government watchdog group that has been opposed to the mayor’s effort to extend term limits. He made several attempts to plead with the Council’s doorkeepers to get access and was rebuffed each time. Finally, he said, he threw himself on the mercy of one of the Council staff members whom he had known for some time.

In the end, he was able to get a seat in the balcony. “I was able to get in because of the relationship I have with some people on the staff here,” Mr. Russianoff said. “But the average New Yorker would not have fared as well as I did. That’s a problem for the average New Yorker who wants to participate in the process.”

Dan Cantor, the executive director of the Working Families Party, was not fortunate. He got as far as the hallway outside of the Council Chamber but was told that he couldn’t enter the large meeting room.

“It’s outrageous that they are keeping people out of the meeting,” said Mr. Cantor, whose organization has also been a leading opponent to the Council extending term limits.

“They know that this meeting would draw a lot of interest from the public,” Mr. Cantor said. “And they should have made some provisions to accommodate the public.”

Public Advocate's Corner: We Need Public Hearings on Term Limits in All Five Borough...

Read original...

New Yorkers voted twice for term limits for elected officials. Now the Mayor wants to overturn the will of the voters by passing a power-grab law that would allow him to serve another 4 years.

This isn’t a debate about how good or bad a mayor Bloomberg has been; it’s about whether or not, in a democracy, it is okay to disregard people’s votes. At the very least, New Yorkers need a chance to weigh in on this decision.

I'm calling on the City Council Speaker and Councilmember Felder to prolong any council vote until public hearings can be held in all five boroughs. There is no reason to rush a vote on October 23rd when we could easily wait until more New Yorkers have had the chance to make their voice heard. Even the mayor's own Charter Revision Commission in 2003 scheduled public hearings in all five boroughs, all in the evening so that working New Yorkers could attend.

Currently, the City Council is planning on hosting two public hearings: Tomorrow October 16 at 1:00 pm Council Chambers at City Hall and Friday, October 17 at 10:00 am Committee Room at City Hall.

I encourage you to attend if you can. However, two public hearings held in Manhattan simply aren't enough, especially for New Yorkers who work 9-5.

Which is why I am co-sponsoring a public forum (with Councilmembers Letitia James and Bill de Blasio) this coming Sunday from 2:30 – 4:30 pm at the Lafayette Presbyterian Church, 85 South Oxford Street between Lafayette and Fulton.

First and foremost, I believe that it is undemocratic to undergo fundamental change in New York City government without extensive public input, so I urge you to attend this public forum and voice your opinion on term limits.

Bloombergs Bid for a Third Term - City Room - Metro - New York Times Blog

Read original...

After months of speculation about his political future, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg plans to announce on Thursday morning that he will seek a third term as mayor, according to three people who have been told of his plans. The extraordinary move promises to upend New York City’s political world. [See full article.]

Right now, Mr. Bloomberg is barred by law from seeking re-election. But he will propose trying to revise the city’s 15-year-old term limits law, which would otherwise force him and dozens of other elected leaders out of office in 2009, the three people said.

Only three mayors in the city’s modern history have served three terms: Fiorello H. La Guardia (1934-1945), Robert F. Wagner (1954-1965) and Edward I. Koch (1978-1989).

As news of Mr. Bloomberg’s decision spread, reaction came in from various quarters. City Comptroller William C. Thompson Jr., who has been planning a run for mayor next year, said in a statement:

First and foremost, the will of the people should not be ignored. I am opposed to any extension of term limits by legislative fiat. The voters have spoken twice, and an attempt to disregard their voice sends a message that democracy has taken a back seat.

While the details of the plan are still unclear, it would be wrong for the City Council to pass self-serving legislation that extends their term in office by four more years. Any attempt to change term limits must be done by voter referendum. A backdoor deal undermines the will of New Yorkers.

New York City can and will survive when leadership changes. We have faced fiscal crises before, and a number of new leaders stepped into office only a few months after the September 11th attacks, when New York City’s economy was in a downward spiral. Democracy is bigger than any one person.

Betsy Gotbaum, the New York City public advocate, said in a statement:

I cannot support extending term limits by anything other than a public vote. It’s up to the people of New York to decide how long they want their elected officials in office, and they’ve already told us twice. It’s an insult to the democratic process and a slap in the face to New Yorkers to now render those votes meaningless.

What matters here is what New Yorkers think and say on this issue, not what one powerful cosmetics heir has to say. The rules can not and should not be changed late in the game. That’s not the way our democracy works.

This is a decision for the people; not for incumbents, not for editorial boards and not for a few wealthy and powerful individuals.

Kathryn S. Wylde, president and chief executive officer of the Partnership for New York City, said in a statement:

The business community urges the City Council to go forward with legislation to extend term limits by four years and urges the Mayor to sign this legislation into law. New York City and the country face a serious economic crisis and continuity in leadership is crucial at this time.

Councilman Bill de Blasio, Democrat of Queens, said in a statement:

While it’s true that we are facing difficult economic times and that Mayor Bloomberg has been a very capable leader, it is up to the people of New York City to decide if we are going to make a wholesale change in our electoral system. Our current term limits law should not be changed at this point except by popular referendum.

Even after September 11, 2001 when then-mayor Rudy Giuliani proposed extending his own term, the people of this city overwhelming opposed changing our election system and schedule. There is little doubt that that was the gravest crisis this city has ever faced, and yet the citizens of New York City believed in the strength of our institutions and knew that new leadership would emerge. As has often been noted, American democracy is based on the idea that ours is a government of laws, not of men or women. This issue must be brought to the people.

The office of Councilman John C. Liu, Democrat of Queens, said in a statement:

Council Member John Liu has long defended the will of the people as expressed through past public referenda. New Yorkers have voted twice before to limit office-holders to eight years. Regrettably, Mayor Michael Bloomberg now appears to favor changing the term limits without putting the question before the voters again. Although John does not support the concept of term limits, he certainly cannot and will not support the mayor pushing this through. Times are tough but so are New Yorkers. And New York is a lot bigger than one man.

Earlier Tuesday, the wealthy business executive Ronald S. Lauder — who financed ballot referendums in 1993 and 1996 limiting New York City officials to two four-year terms — said he now supports allowing Mr. Bloomberg to seek re-election next year.

Later on Tuesday, the Opinion section of The Times published an editorial endorsing the idea of ending term limits. (It should be noted that City Room is a news blog and that the newsroom is not involved in editorial page decisions or deliberations.)

Readers are invited to address these questions: Should Mr. Bloomberg seek to run again? Should the term-limits law be changed? If so, is it acceptable for the City Council and mayor to do so on their own — without a direct popular vote like the referendums in 1993 and 1996 that imposed term limits? (Most experts say it is too late to call a voter referendum in time for the November 2009 election.)

Forum News: Officials Tour Reservoir and Push to Preserve Wilderness by Nicole Turso

Read original...



A forgotten reservoir reclaimed by the wilderness has become a natural wildlife and flora preserve where residents, community groups and elected officials gathered on Tuesday for a tour and to petition for its integrity.



The Ridgewood Reservoir, on the Queens and Brooklyn border, was decommissioned in 1990 after serving as a back-up water supply from 1858 through 1959. Once the three basins were drained, decades of neglect allowed for natural forests, fields and wetlands to form—now home to at least 127 species of birds as well as mammals, reptiles and a variety of native plants.

In 2004, Mayor Michael Bloomberg transferred the 50 acres of wilderness to the city Parks Department and a $50 million “renovation” project was put into place, which would convert more than 20 acres of land into athletic fields and recreational facilities for the neighboring communities.

However, many community activists and government officials believe the reservoir would serve better as a nature preserve for environmental study in an urban area that does not have such natural luxuries. Some argue the money would be better spent renovating existing ballfields at adjacent Highland Park.

“We have a gem here in the reservoir that many people in the community, as evidence here, want to preserve,” said community activist David Quintana.

Highland Park, located directly across from the reservoir, is equipped to provide the same recreation planned in the renovation project—with two baseball fields, several basketball and volleyball courts and picnic areas.

According to the Highland Park/Ridgewood Reservoir Alliance, the park is in desperate need of renovation and repair—an issue the alliance and activists have brought to the attention of city officials.

Congressman Edolphus Towns (D-Brooklyn), Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (D-Brooklyn/Queens), Queens Borough Parks Commissioner Dorothy Lewandowski and representatives of Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-Queens), Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum and State Senator Serf Maltese (R-Glendale) attended the reservoir tour on Tuesday to survey the basins in their current condition.

“This park here contains an ecosystem that we must protect, we must enhance and we must preserve,“said Rep. Velazquez, “We must come together to work to make sure that we do what is right on behalf of the community and behalf of the park.”

“There are a lot of parks here that can be upgraded [that] have been for too long neglected,” she explained. “I can tell you that if the city, the state and the federal government come together, we can assure you that we will fight to get the resources that we need to have the parks that we can all be proud of.”

The group set out to tour the reservoir and was informed that in order to reach basin three, one of three basins at the reservoir, the congressional representatives would have to repel down the side of the basin on a long, rather thin rope.

“I hope that rope is strong,” Rep. Towns joked.

A flash of apprehension crossed Rep. Velazquez’s face before her descent, but she, along with nine other members of the party made it down safely and arrived back at the top of the basin, triumphant looks on their faces.

As the group toured the rest of the basins, which were drained in the 1960’s through the 1980’s, it was given an idea as to what renovations must be completed to make the reservoir into a useable facility. Both basins one and three have become natural forests, while basin two, though drained, fills with water as a natural marsh.

Broken lampposts—shattered—with shards of what used to be lighting fixtures, poison ivy coiling around trees and original wrought iron fences, and uninviting entry ways make the reservoir unappealing to onlookers—but a secret garden of sorts for those inside.

“You just cannot buy this—the experience,” said Rep. Velazquez. Renovation ideas tossed around between the elected officials and Parks Department personnel along the walk included taller lampposts less prone to damage and vandals and the use of solar energy as a more eco-conscious way of lighting paths at night.

Three design consultants created conceptual plans for the renovation and redesign of the reservoir based on preliminary analysis for the city. A contract with Mark K. Morrison Associates Ltd. (MMA) was submitted by the Parks Department as a project to help combat raising rates of childhood obesity and focused on developing athletic fields.

However, the contract was rejected by city Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr. and returned to the Parks Department with concerns about the environmental impact, increased truck traffic and the vendor selection process. Parks is now reportedly working on a contract with a different firm, EDAW, which prides itself on balancing “aesthetic, environmental and social goals.”

Also supporting the preservation of the reservoir as a natural area are local community boards in both Brooklyn and Queens, the Queens Civic Congress and a number of community organizations.

Even with the overwhelming support to preserve the reservoir’s wilderness, Rep. Towns is still calling on the surrounding communities and their residents to continue their efforts, despite obstacles.

“It’s going to require working together, and it’s going to require a lot of talking and a lot of meetings, and of course it’s going to require some negotiating,” Towns explained, “I’m committed to working with you to make certain that we have the resources to do this, there’s no question about it.”

Towns summed up the feelings of many residents fighting for the preservation of the reservoir when he addressed the crowd. To a chorus of applause and laughter, representative Towns shared an anecdote: “I received a phone call asking me ‘Where are you? I’ll call you from the park.’ I said, ‘I live in Highland Park, I’m already there.’”

Photo: Congressman Edolphus Towns and Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez discuss the future of the Ridgewood Reservoir during a recent tour.

The Forum Newsgroup/photos by NICOLE TURSO

Parks' Fake Grass Can Reach a Scorching 162 Degrees by Jeff Wilkins and Elizabeth Hays - NY Daily News

Read original...

Watch Video and listen to Bill Crain, parks advocate, as he describes his research and views on synthetic turf....

Video length 9 min 53 seconds

It's like walking on hot coals.

Artificial turf installed in city fields can heat up to a blistering 162 degrees even on a mild summer day, a Daily News investigation has found.

"My feet are burning! I had to dump cold water on my shoes just to walk around," Yannick Pena, 9, complained to his mom on a recent visit to Macombs Dam Park in the Bronx, where The News found the turf hit temperatures of 145 to 160 degrees on an 80-degree day.

At Staten Island's Greenbelt Recreation Center, where turf temperatures reached 149, park regular Diana Stentella, 58, wondered how kids survived the heat.

"When they play soccer here, do they have an ambulance to take the kids away?" Stentella said. "On a hot, humid day you would faint out here."

Over two mildly warm days last month, The News took surface temperature readings at five synthetic fields across the city accompanied by NYC Park Advocates, a group that has been critical of the fake grass.

At all five, temperatures at the synthetic fields soared roughly twice as high as at nearby natural grass ones, from a low of 144 degrees at the Greenbelt Recreation Center on Staten Island to a scorching 162 at Flushing Meadows-Corona Park in Queens.

"It's sadistic that the city is installing a product which gets so hot and is actually expecting the public to play on it," said NYC Park Advocates President Geoffrey Croft.

"Clearly, artificial turf presents many serious public health and safety issues that the city simply refuses to address," Croft said.

The scorching temperatures are just one of the nagging fears critics have about the turf, an infill made of recycled crumb rubber from old tires.

The city has installed the turf at nearly 100 parks and playgrounds across the city. An additional 68 projects are in the works.

Earlier this year, The News reported concerns that the millions of tiny crumbs contain heavy metals like lead and cadmium, as well as volatile organic compounds and other chemicals.

"This is very alarming," said Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum when told of The News' findings. "Now this, on top of the other questions we have. There needs to be a moratorium on these fields."

Despite the uproar, a city Department of Health study concluded this spring that the chemicals in synthetic turf fields cause no known health problems.

Health officials acknowledged fake fields can get excessively hot and can cause more heat-related problems, especially in children.

When confronted with The News' findings, the Parks Department also conceded high temperatures can be a problem at turf fields.

They said they were in the process of installing signs warning visitors of the dangers at fields across the city.

"The temperatures can get very high during the heat of the day. But people are smart. They are not going to use a place that is uncomfortable to play on," said Liam Kavanagh, first deputy parks commissioner.

Kavanagh also said the city plans to stop using the crumb-rubber infill because of excessive heat and switch over to a carpet-style turf.

One of the fields The News tested, in Macombs Dam Park, already has the new turf - and still tested as high as 160 degrees.

"My feet always blister coming out here. The bottoms of my shoes feel like melted rubber, it gets so hot," said Luis Coronell, 33, who regularly takes his 10-year-old nephew, Andres, to play on turf field because there are no real ones in the neighborhood.

"You bring the kids out here, but you can't do anything because the turf gets too hot," Coronell said. "This turf is a killer."

ehays@nydailynews.com

Forum for Public School Parents on the State of Our Schools and Mayoral Control May 27th - Queens Borough Hall...

There will be a public hearing on May 27, 2008 at 6 pm - 8 pm presented by Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum and the Commission on School Governance. The hearing will be held at Queens Borough Hall (120-55 Queens Blvd - Room # 213 - Kew Gardens, NY 11424. For information or to RSVP: rsvp@pubadvoate.nyc.gov

Residents Want School Boards Back by Ben Hogwood - Queens tribune

Read original...

No communication, no leadership and absolutely no improvement.

This is what members of Community Education Council District 24, as well as area parents and local education officials, had to say Tuesday about the current mayoral form of control over public schools.

Nick Comaianni, President of CEC 24, said the schools may have had some issues under school boards – the previous form of control – but it was nothing compared to the current system.

“Though the school boards aren’t perfect, I would take them any day over mayoral control,” he said.

The comments came at the request of Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, who at the urging of the State Legislature established a Commission on School Governance to study the effectiveness of the mayoral control system. The Legislature will decide next year whether to continue, modify, or do away with the mayoral control system, which Mayor Michael Bloomberg acquired in 2002. Gotbaum’s commission is compiling input from a wide swath of the populace and will make recommendations to the State.

“We’re trying to be extremely objective,” she told an audience of around 35 in PS 49 in Middle Village, adding that opinions had varied, though they often differed depending on whom she spoke with.

While many parents have blasted the system, officials – including City Department of Education Chancellor Joel Klein and Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott – have praised it, she said.

There was no praise coming from attendees at this meeting. Comaianni said a major problem now is that local boards and superintendents have no control and no one in the Department of Education will listen and respond to questions and concerns.

When the Department of Education does respond to questions, the answers are never straightforward, he said.

“The Department of Education has lied to me 99 percent of the time,” he said. “I’ve come to the point where I really can’t trust what they say.”

Education Council Member Peter Vercessi said it took the department two years to respond to questions regarding how to test and place gifted students. Comaianni added under the former system, it would have only taken a matter of weeks to get a response.

Audience member Bob Cermelli said the mayoral system was supposed to encourage a more democratic approach to controlling the schools. Instead, the opposite has happened.

And Marge Kolb, a former CEC member and a parent, said “mayoral control” was a misnomer. “We have mayoral autocracy,” she said. “We’re trusting the school system to take care of our kids and it’s not working.”

She said the chancellor is not an educator but a lawyer, and in less than seven years there has been four different chancellors, scuttling continuity.

Giving an example of the lack of local control, Comaianni said the mayor had banned students having cell phones in schools despite districts voting in favor of them.

“We are not happy with this system,” he said.

The Pencil Portfolio by Andrew J. Hawkins - City Hall News

Read original...


The law that gives Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Unaff.) complete control of the city's 1,100-plus public schools expires in a little less than 13 months, but Dennis Walcott, the deputy mayor of education, is barely sweating.

Walcott, who also serves as one of Bloomberg's top education negotiators in Albany, is confident state legislators will reauthorize the five-year-old law. But with more than a year left to negotiate the terms, Walcott said he is concentrating instead on improving graduation rates and student performance.

“Right now our goal is results, results, results,” he said, sitting in a conference room at City Hall, his eyes narrowing behind a pair of throwback horned-rimmed glasses.

Especially in the wake of the Sean Bell verdict, Walcott’s public presence of late has been through his role as the most senior African-American member of the administration, going beyond his education portfolio to advise and assist the mayor in this racially charged situation.

But most of his time and energy is devoted to ensuring the continuation of mayoral control past the end of Bloomberg's term, in the hopes of securing a key part of the mayor’s political legacy. That means the private conversations with those who will ultimately make the decision, the public testimony and the constant effort to make the system as strong as possible going in to the review process next year.

After six years of mayoral control, Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum (D), Albany legislators, Council members and the teachers union are all looking to weigh in on the debate, which has sharply divided many New Yorkers. Over half a dozen reports and assessments on school governance are slated to come out before the State Legislature even takes up the issue.

Mayoral control could mean the difference between success and failure, Walcott said. A product of New York public schools, he believes today's system is the best that has existed in decades. Higher math scores, smaller class sizes, safer schools and more choices for families are all products of Bloomberg's ability to run the system from City Hall.

But opponents of mayoral control contend that the policy shuts parents out of the debate over school reforms. With the law set to sunset next year, many parents, politicians and educators are pushing for greater checks and balances and a larger role for parents.

Diane Ravitch, an education professor at New York University and an opponent of mayoral control, points to poor reading and math scores in 4th and 8th graders from 2003 to 2007 as evidence of the shortcomings of mayoral control.

And those are not the only problems she sees.

“Did the mayor or the chancellor resolve to investigate the cause of the flat reading scores?” Ravitch wrote in an email. “No, they did not. Did they promise to install a better reading program? No, they did not. Did they admit that the reading program they mandated across the city at great cost was a failure? No, they did not.”

Ravitch predicts that the State Legislature will reauthorize mayoral control, but with caveats.

“There should be a restoration of some form of democratic governance in education and some ability by the public to limit no-bid contracts and get real accountability by the education authorities,” she wrote.

But Walcott said any effort to limit the mayor's management of the schools would be regressive.

In his frequent trips to Albany to talk with state lawmakers, he said the concerns he hears are mainly parochial, and not about the system as a whole.

“Obviously there's an overarching issue in reauthorization,” he said, “but in my interaction with them, in my engagement with them, it's really around a lot of the district issues.”

If anything, mayoral control has improved policy discussions between lawmakers, school administrators, parents, teachers and community leaders because it has made the system more transparent and less bureaucratic, Walcott said.

Raised in Queens by a social worker and an exterminator for the city's Housing Authority, Walcott worked as a daycare instructor and a kindergarten teacher before becoming the executive director of the Harlem Dowling's West Side Center, a social services non-profit. He started during the height of the crack epidemic.

Those who know him from that role say he still carries the experience with him.

“Dennis is both a social worker and an educator,” said Dorothy Worrell, the center's current executive director. “Without a doubt, he's from the trenches. And he doesn’t hesitate to go back into the trenches when he’s needed.”

In 1990, Walcott was tapped to head the New York chapter of the Urban League, where he launched countless new services for the disadvantaged.

Bloomberg appointed him deputy mayor of policy in 2002. At the start of the second term, Walcott transitioned to deputy mayor of education and community development, overseeing the Department of Education, the Department of Youth and Community Development, the City University of New York and the New York City School Construction Authority.

Walcott has weathered several crises over the years—from the school bus fiasco of 2007, to accusations of school security officers using excessive force with some students, to the fierce debate surrounding metal detectors in schools.

Throughout all, he has retained his trademark calm air about him, said City Council Member Robert Jackson (D-Manhattan), chair of the Education Committee and an opponent of mayoral control.

“I have not known Dennis to yell or scream or get emotional sometimes like I do,” said Jackson, who has known Walcott since his days at the Urban League. “And over the past several years, he’s gotten smoother and more in tune with the bureaucratic processes.”

But their disagreements, including those over proposed education cuts, have cooled Jackson's opinion of Bloomberg, and, as a result, his opinion of Walcott.

“Dennis maintains the status quo,” said Jackson. “I don't think that he’s making waves. And I don't think that in his position the mayor would want him to make waves.”

On the contrary, Walcott said he has been working with the mayor to radically change the education system in the city, improving outcomes for students and raising graduation rates, which Walcott says are “getting better and needing to get better-er.”

Like most in the administration, Walcott hesitates to reflect too much on his career post-Bloomberg, preferring instead to stress the intimidating workload he has in the remaining 19 months.

But there was one job Walcott said he would consider: principal of a rough-and-tumble high school, like Morgan Freeman’s character in Lean on Me.

“It's a different kind of job,” Walcott said wistfully. “Because I'd be right there directly in the heart of what I've been talking about my whole life."

Leased Schools Need More Oversight, Say Critics by Austin Constandine - Queens Chronicle

Read original...

Read Public Advocate Report...

As this season’s legislative session nears an end, a legal “loophole” that allows the city’s School Construction Authority to build schools on leased sites with minimal public oversight may be allowed to survive, despite intense criticism in recent weeks.

The city’s Public Advocate, Betsy Gotbaum, was the latest to enter the fray, when her office released a report summarizing the issue last week.

"The (School Construction Authority) has chosen a number of sites for new schools without conducting an environmental assessment that meets the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act ... or submitting to meaningful public review,” the report reads.

At issue are sections 1731 and 1732 of the state’s Public Authorities Law, which require that all school construction on city-owned property undergo a lengthy public review process. As part of the process, the SCA must prepare an Environmental Impact Statement per SERQA requirements, which are made available for public and legislative scrutiny. Under law, the SCA must also file copies of the site plan with the City Planning Commission, the relevant Community Education Council and community board and with the City Council for final approval.

The problem, some say, is that the law does not specifically mention schools on sites leased by the city, which critics have characterized as a “loophole” that needs to be closed. Under current law, an EIS is not required for a leased school site, nor is approval by the City Council or submittal to the relevant community board for review.

According to a Department of Education, memo, the SCA currently conducts environmental reviews for any proposed leasing site, which “work(s) to insure that new and leased facilities are environmentally safe for our children and staff.” In what could perhaps be read as justification for the difference in processes between city-owned and leased sites, the department cited a “scarcity of sites for school construction in the city’s more densely populated areas,” and a need to “provide desperately needed seats on an expedited basis.”

Unsurprisingly, Queens, often cited as having the most overcrowded schools in the city, is at the very center of the debate, with several existing or planned schools on leased sites.

The Robert F. Wagner Jr. School, in Hunters Point, is one example. The school was built on a Queens West Development Corp. industrial site, which underwent extensive environmental clean-up. In 2006, the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation issued a “certificate of completion” for parts of the site under the state’s Brownfield Cleanup Program.

Though there have been no reported problems, critics contend that the public is merely being asked to trust the DOE and SCA because the environmental review was not public. There is a history of contamination on other parts of Queens West, and the Brownfield environmental easement agreement for the site restricts the use of underlying groundwater and prohibits vegetable gardens.

Similar transparency concerns have arisen in recent years over Information Technology High School in Long Island City, located in a former metal plating factory, P.S. 65 in Ozone Park, a former airline parts factory, and the Art and Leather High School, currently under construction in Elmhurst at the site of a former leather tannery.

As the public advocate’s report makes clear, there is no documented evidence that any current or future school poses a risk to children. Still, the report argues that it is precisely this documentation that is lacking in the public sphere, which leaves the process open to less oversight.

“If it’s policy for newly acquired property, why wouldn’t it be necessary for leased property?” asked Dmytro Fedkowskyj, the newly appointed Queens representative on the city’s Panel for Education Policy. “The issues and concerns are the same. And we need to be absolutely certain that the area is safe from toxins for our students.”

The Democratic-led state Assembly passed a bill last June, introduced by Assemblywoman Cathy Nolan (D-Ridgewood), that would have closed the loophole, but the bill died in the Republican-led state Senate in January and was returned to the Assembly. The bill, A.8838, was passed again on April 30 with a nearly unanimous vote and was returned once again to the Senate.

Assemblywoman Barbara Clark (D-Queens Village) was the only dissenting vote when the Assembly bill to close the loophole was passed 140-1.

In a telephone interview, Clark explained the reasons for her vote, citing the difficulty in finding adequate building sites for schools. She also emphasized the need to swiftly address overcrowding concerns, focusing on “safety, but also expediency, in getting things done.”

The bill has strong support from the City Council, however. Though the council has no legislative authority over the matter, last year its members unanimously passed a resolution that called on both state legislative bodies to act to pass bill A.8838.

The state Assembly has already done its half, but the bill must be passed by the state Senate and signed by the governor before becoming law. To that end, Sen. John Sabini (D-Jackson Heights) has introduced a bill that is the same as A.8838.

The bill has once again met with opposition, as some Senators work to pass a separate bill, introduced by State Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Bellerose). S.6393 would require the SCA to conduct documentary review and, if deemed necessary, a follow-up field investigation based on American Society of Testing and Materials guidelines. The bill has the support of the mayor’s office and the DOE, and would also require the DOE and local CECs to make the plan available for public review for up to 60 days, as well as to conduct a public hearing

Padavan has come under fire in recent weeks by critics who see no reason why schools on city-owned and leased sites should be reviewed any differently.

Councilman James Gennaro (D-Fresh Meadows), one of Padavan’s more outspoken critics and his presumptive opponent for state Senate in 2008, said in a joint press conference at City Hall on April 28 that “Padavan and the Senate majority should be ashamed of themselves for letting this bill get watered down and die in Albany.” Gennaro was joined by Councilmen Robert Jackson (D-Manhattan), Eric Gioia (D-Sunnyside) and John Liu (D-Flushing).

In a statement, Padavan, like the DOE and the mayor, said that his “number one priority has been and will always be safeguarding the health, safety and well being of our children,” adding that his second priority was “to continue the recent success the (DOE) has achieved in significantly reducing overcrowded classrooms in our schools.

Legal Loopholes Keep Parents in the Dark? by Henrick A. Karoliszyn - Queens Ledger

Read original...

View report - PA Gotbaum: Legal Loophole Keeps Parents in the Dark on Environmental Cleanup of Schools

Shouldn't parents know if a school is being built on toxins? Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum thinks so. Gotbaum wants to patch a loophole, she says, is puncturing the local school system - including Tech High School in Long Island City and the Robert Wagner School in Hunters Point.

Specifically, a recent report detailing a discrepancy in the Public Authorities Law (PAL), allows the School Construction Authority (SCA) to open education buildings on potentially contaminated grounds that could pose a health threat for school children.

When the SCA builds a new school on property it owns, state law requires that it submit a site plan to community board and give the City Council the opportunity to vote on the plan and conduct a public environmental review.

However, because of the ambiguity in the law, when a new school is being created on a leased site, these requirements do not apply. Even when there are known toxins present, there may be no public environmental review of the site, no opportunity for public feedback, and no Council oversight.

Gotbaum wants to change this.

She said the city is opening schools on leased sites that could be dangerous without City Council oversight.

Gotbaum stated the issue at hand is not whether or not schools in Queens necessarily pose an immediate threat. Her concern is to ensure that parents know when there is a potentially contaminated site. "Parents should have a right to know,” she said during a conference call with reporters last week. “Communities need to be notified."

With that idea she wants to pass a bill that will allow for clearness. That would be her subsequent step after drawing attention to the cause. Gotbaum insisted she would be able to close the hole in the system with the law.

She outlined her plans to do it.

Those included Council oversight of leased properties, having an outside consultant review the city's environment testing results, and availability of online public repositories that list contaminated school grounds.

Additionally, when the SCA leases an existing facility or constructs a new building, Gotbaum believes it should follow the rules by conducting a public environmental review.

"When it comes to our children's health, we can't afford to make poor decisions," she said. "State law must be amended to require a public process and environmental review of leased school sites."

Boro Coordinators Get Better Marks by Jess Wisloski - NY Daily News

Read original...

Read report...

Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum is less than impressed that 78% of the city's parent coordinators did not return calls in a survey by her office.

But Queens did better than most, she found.

Out of 20 schools contacted, coordinators at 75% of them either picked up the phone or called back her office workers, who were posing as parents new to the school.

Parent coordinators fumed at Gotbaum last week.

"It's a deceiving number," said Public School 128 coordinator Melissa Phillips.

"The phone calls are such a small part of what we do for parents," she said at a Community Education Council meeting for District 24 on April 29.

A District 24 worker added that 16 of the district's city-issued cell phones - more than 30% - were broken and never replaced.

The parent coordinator job was created in a 2002 mayoral initiative to provide better access to school administrators.

A coordinator must convene parent meetings, attend other parent meetings, organize school events, maintain contact with community groups, increase parent involvement and act as a facilitator between parents and the school.

After-hours work is mandatory and the city provides cell phones so coordinators can take evening calls.

The average salary is less than $40,000 a year.

Most parent coordinators do not pick up calls after 5 p.m., according to Gotbaum's survey.

"I'm not damning the whole program," said Gotbaum. "I'm just saying this survey just keeps getting worse."

In 2004, 62% of messages left for parent coordinators were not returned.

Gotbaum's study of 100 schools found coordinators with nonworking numbers, no voice mail to leave a message, and in some cases, the position was unfilled. The city spends $68 million a year on the positions.

Parents Groups Playing Hooky by Jess Wisloski

Read original...

Education advocates have long warned that the diminishing role for parents in schools will eventually kill off parent involvement altogether.

Now, the city's own findings on the efficacy of two avenues available for parents to weigh in on their childrens' schools back up Mayor Bloomberg's critics.

Out of 100 schools, 78% of parent coordinators - the on-staff liaisons between parents and the school - could not be reached on their city-provided cell phones, according to a survey by Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum.

And the Department of Education's own parent engagement office found that only 51% of the schools it has looked at so far has a functioning School Leadership Team (SLT).

The news may be no surprise to parents, who have bemoaned many of the administration's reforms - including disbanding local school boards.

But for educators, whose jobs are to engage parents, recent tallies are worrisome.

"It's really embarrassing to say our district's Presidents Council is not even in effect right now," Michelle Lloyd-Bey, the community superintendent of Queens District 27, said at a community meeting in March. A Presidents Council represents all the PTAs in a district.

She added that SLTs - a body of teachers and parents that help in school decision-making - "are not sending documentation as they're supposed to, not keeping records, and in some cases they're not even functioning."

Martine Guerrier, the city's chief of parent engagement, said her office is working to fix the problems. "SLTs have always been an issue," she said. Her office began looking into SLTs recently and found that many only existed on paper. But in district surveys, 83% of schools claimed they had SLTs.

Guerrier's office was created last year to address some of these complaints. "We just started, so there's no way to tell right now, but I'm encouraged by what I've seen," she said of the city's progress.

But William McDonald, a parent in Queens District 29 who also heads the citywide Chancellor's Parent Advisory Committee, said the effect of Bloomberg's initiatives on parent involvement has been "a mess."

"It's to the point now where SLTs don't function at all," he said, noting the problem began in 2003 when the city eliminated SLT budgets. The city instead hired "SLT coordinators" - a job that was dissolved last year.

And with the PTAs also disappearing or growing less active, McDonald sees a dim future.

"As I see it, in three years, parent involvement probably won't even exist," he said.

jwisloski@nydailynews.com

Public Advocate Says City Schools Are Dropping The Ball On Fitness - NY1: Education

Read Public Advocate Report...

Summary: This survey, a follow-up to a 2004 report also conducted by the office, found that while small improvements in access to P.E. have been made, only 4% of third graders participate in P.E. class every day, as mandated by state law. The Public Advocate found that despite a growing obesity crisis, the Department of Education (DOE) is still failing to provide students with the adequate and legally mandated amount of physical education (P.E.).

Read original...

Watch video...


New York City public schools aren't doing enough to help kids stay fit, according to a report released Sunday by Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum.

Gotbaum's office found that the majority of elementary and middle schools are falling far below the state physical education mandates.

"Diabetes is a huge problem in this city and one of the ways kids can avoid getting diabetes is by having adequate exercise," said the public advocate.

Among the findings: 96 percent of schools do not meet phys ed requirements for third graders, and 88 percent fall short in their requirements for fourth graders.

"What's so frustrating about the child obesity epidemic is that is often has a simple if unsurprising remedy: activity and physical education," said Comptroller William Thompson at a press conference Sunday to unveil the report.

"You know what? They're doing too much testing about reading and math; let's have a little more physical activity, that would make our kids well rounded and healthy," added Gotbaum. "We need have the school system figure out a way to incorporate physical activity into their daily sessions."

State regulations require daily physical education classes through third grade and a minimum of two hours per week from fourth through sixth grades.

DOE says Gotbaum's numbers are flawed because about one-third of the schools she contacted did not respond.

The department also points out that dance classes can satisfy the P.E. requirement. One mom says her son is learning dance and loving it.

One mom says her son is learning dance and loving it.

"That's obviously very physical and they learn various international dance techniques."

Denham says her kids also run a lot during recess. But some parents agree with Gotbaum, saying the schools are not doing enough.

"A couple kids get together in the gym and play, but it's not a real workout," said another parent. "Not like he gets out here in the street."

A DOE spokesperson says the department is making progress in fitness and health education, and points out that 90 percent of elementary schools have dedicated phys ed teachers, up from 75 percent five years ago.

After 5 Years, City Council Holds First Hearing on Mayor’s Control of Public Schools by Jennifer Medina - New York Times

Read original...

Chancellor Joel I. Klein, right, and Deputy Mayor Dennis M. Walcott testifying on Monday before a City Council committee. Legislative approval of the new centralized system ends in 2009.

Since taking control of New York City’s 1,400 public schools, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has steadfastly maintained that centralized, mayoral oversight is critical to turning around the vast system. But that view came under sharp attack on Monday as the City Council held the first public hearing on the state law authorizing mayoral control.

During three hours of testimony that was at times tense, Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein and Deputy Mayor Dennis M. Walcott adamantly defended the system, saying that since Mr. Bloomberg took charge more than five years ago, city schools have dramatically improved in matters like test scores, graduation rates, communication with parents and spending.

Mr. Klein said that improved management within the city’s Department of Education had led to greater accountability and had turned the city into a model for other urban systems seeking to eliminate turmoil from supervision by local school boards.

“In the absence of mayoral control, we’ve never been able to sustain continuity in the Department of Education,” said Mr. Klein, who is the longest serving chancellor in recent memory. “The fundamental governance structure of mayoral accountability and control, I think, is right and needs to be maintained.”

But several council members were skeptical.

“Parents have more information than ever before, but parents don’t have input into policy making, and that is something that many parents have come in very concerned about,” said James Vacca, a co-chairman of the Council’s task force on school governance. “We’re concerned about whether there is any place for meaningful oversight.”

Like other groups throughout the city, including the teachers’ union, the Public Advocate’s office and several universities, the Council is holding a series of hearings this year to draw up recommendations for the State Legislature as it considers whether to renew the law granting mayoral control, which expires in 2009.

Mr. Vacca and other council members suggested that they supported changing the law to grant “municipal control” over the schools, apparently a way to give the Council more power over the education department. He also said he would urge a more formal role for neighborhood superintendents, who have little power over the schools now, and for the Community Education Councils, which are organizations of parents and local leaders that also have little sway over policy.

Several council members called the Panel for Educational Policy, which replaced the Board of Education, nothing more than a “rubber stamp” that had no ability to influence the chancellor’s decisions.

But throughout their testimony, Mr. Walcott and Mr. Klein resisted suggestions that would potentially weaken the mayor’s power over the system, with Mr. Walcott going so far as saying that the current structure is “the best system that has existed in the last 35 years.”

“What we have today should not be undone,” Mr. Walcott said in his opening remarks. “It would be an injustice to our children. Accountability needs to rest with someone, and it should be the mayor, whoever that individual is.”

Still, Mr. Walcott and Mr. Klein acknowledged shortcomings, particularly in terms of community outreach. While the department had spent millions to hire parent coordinators in each of the city’s schools, Mr. Klein said he had waited too long to create the post of a “chief family engagement officer” to oversee the coordinators and work with parent councils around the city.

In testimony, several members of the parent councils criticized some of the administration policies — on class size, testing and promotion, for example — saying that the chancellor had not done enough to consider their opinions.

The Manhattan borough president, Scott M. Stringer, who voted in favor of mayoral control as an assemblyman in 2002, said the Bloomberg administration had exerted more control than the Legislature intended to give it.

“We thought they would be part of the life and breath of the city, but they think they don’t have to respond to questions,” Mr. Stringer said. Referring to the name of the education department’s building, he added, “They’ve gotten caught up in the Boss Tweed mentality.”

The harshest criticism came from Councilman John C. Liu, who suggested that several of the mayor’s education-policy changes had been politically motivated.

“Mayoral control was not meant to be martial law,” Mr. Liu said.

The words provoked a terse response from Mr. Walcott, who said that policy changes were not politically motivated and added, “I totally disagree with you.”

Concerns Grow But the Grass Doesn't by Anne Schwartz - Gotham Gazette

Read original...

In 1999, my son played on his first soccer team, a band of unruly five-year-olds called the Red Strikers who lost every game that spring. But I remember far less about the team than I do about the field they played on at Brooklyn's Parade Grounds. Hard use and neglect had left it as bumpy as a dirt road, with large bald spots that became puddles when it rained. My son invariably came home covered with either mud or dust.

So it seemed a small miracle when, a few years later, many of the Parade Ground's fields became some of the first in the city to be renovated with synthetic turf. The surface, made with green plastic "blades" packed with rubber crumbs made of shredded used tires, was beautifully smooth, cushioned and well-marked. It was durable and dried quickly after a rain, offering a lot more playing time to all the local teams clamoring for fields.

But some things bothered me. My son's cleats and uniform now shed little rubber pellets instead of dirt. Was there anything toxic in the bits of shredded tire that spread all over our apartment? The fields turned out to be brutally hot in summer, and the coaches at soccer camp warned the kids to bring extra water so they could withstand the heat. And then there was the loss of yet another connection to nature for urban children.

These concerns, as well as evidence that synthetic turf contributes to the urban "heat island" effect and storm-water runoff problems, have led elected officials and environmental groups to call for a time-out in the use of synthetic turf.

Today, Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum and three environmental and parks advocacy organizations are releasing a letter to Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe and Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden. It calls on the parks department to stop installing synthetic turf immediately and to a make schedule for replacing existing turf fields, which disintegrate within a decade. The letter also demands that the health department complete a review of the literature on the health effects of synthetic turf before the startof the spring sports season and calls for testing actual turf installed in the parks for contaminants.

On the state level, Assemblymember Steve Englebright has introduced legislation that would put a six-month moratorium on the purchase and installation of synthetic turf statewide until health and environmental agencies conduct a more rigorous study of the crumb rubber.

The Trouble with Grass

Grass athletic fields require frequent mowing, watering, spraying for weeds, and litter clean-ups, and need to be reseeded every five years. At a time when the demand for playing space has exploded, the city's budget for park maintenance and staff remains tight, and the parks department has not been able keep up with the maintenance of many of its more than 600 baseball, football and soccer fields. The advocacy group New Yorkers for Parks' annual report card on the conditions in 200 neighborhood parks consistently has found poor conditions in the city's athletic fields.

Grass fields must be rested on a regular basis and closed when wet. The Central Park Conservancy keeps its baseball diamonds verdant by shutting them all winter and resting them on a rotating basis throughout the rest of the year. This creates an impossible choice between preserving fields and providing enough playing time for the city's growing number of school teams and sports leagues. With childhood obesity increasing at an alarming rate, the need for places where children can run and play has become more important than ever. Groups already fight over the use of fields, as is evident from the furor over a plan that would have given private schools preferential use of new public playing fields on Randall's Island.

The New York City parks department has embraced synthetic turf as a low-maintenance, cost-effective way to meet the city's growing need for playing fields that can stand up to heavy, year-round use. Since 1998, the department has installed synthetic turf on 77 fields (60 of them replacing existing natural fields), and it has contracted to convert 25 asphalt space to turf over the next few years, making New York the largest municipal buyer of synthetic turf in the country.

Although the synthetic turf fields are more expensive to install than natural ones, the parks department says they are cost-effective when their life span and maintenance costs are factored in. A natural field costs an average of $152,739 a year, versus a maximum of $105,000 a year for synthetic turf, according to figures recently provided by department spokesman Philip Abramson. A new grass field with drainage, irrigation, rich soil and a special blend of grass seed costs $690,000, with an expected five-year life span; yearly equipment, staffing and other maintenance comes to $14,739. A synthetic turf field costs $600,000 to $1 million to install but has an expected ten-year life, plus $5,000 in annual maintenance costs.

Critics question these cost assumptions, however. It is not yet clear how long the synthetic turf will last, noted Christian DiPalermo, executive director of New Yorkers for Parks, which began noting the condition of synthetic turf fields as a separate feature in its 2006 parks report card. Also, the parks department's numbers do not include disposal costs, which could be higher than expected if it turns out that contaminants in the rubber crumbs require that they be handled as hazardous waste.

The parks department also highlights synthetic turf's positive environmental impact: It doesn't require watering, pesticides, fertilizers or mowing. However, according to New Yorkers for Parks' 2006 report, "The New Turf Wars," the parks department may be overstating these benefits. It notes that although grass needs to be watered to stay healthy, "synthetic turf also performs better when watered." (In any case, few of the city's athletic fields have irrigation systems.) The parks department also makes minimal use of pesticides and herbicides on natural grass, according to the report.

Although the city has said that synthetic turf will be used primarily as a substitute for asphalt, most of the existing synthetic turf fields replaced natural fields. "However, in most cases, when synthetic turf replaces grass, it's because the grass is actually gone, having been worn away from overuse," said Abramson in an e-mail. "Thomas Jefferson Park in East Harlem is an example of a grass field that became a dust bowl, causing such severe asthma concerns in the community that local elected officials asked us to shut it down. Now, with the installation of a synthetic turf field, it is a wonderful asset for the residents in that area."

What's in That Turf, Anyway?

Nearly all of the synthetic turf installed in New York City is made of plastic strands woven into a porous backing and filled in with a thick layer of pulverized rubber for cushioning. Most of the safety concerns focus on the rubber crumbs. A surprisingly large quantity is used: The average soccer field contains enough of the crumbs to make up 27,000 tires.

The parks department maintains that the particles are inert and do not release any chemicals when inhaled or swallowed. The New York City health department, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the Connecticut Department of Public Health have all "essentially stated that these fields pose an unlikely health risk to the public and that there is no reason to stop installing these fields," Abramson said.

But a recent study conducted by the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, which found that toxic chemicals could vaporize or leach from the crumb rubber, recommended further research on the safety of the materials.

In the study, commissioned by Environment and Human Health, Inc., a Connecticut nonprofit, researchers heated the rubber particles to 131 degrees Fahrenheit, about as hot as they would get in sunlight when the air is 88 degrees. The crumbs released four volatile organic chemicals known to irritate the skin, eyes and lungs. One of the chemicals is a recognized carcinogen suspected to have adverse effects on the endocrine, gastrointestinal, nervous and immune systems. Two dozen other chemicals were detected at lower levels.

When the researchers exposed the granules to water, they released zinc, cadmium and lead, raising the possibility that these potentially harmful metals could migrate from synthetic fields into the soil and groundwater.

Creating 'Hot Spots'

Other concerns focus on the impact of synthetic turf on the urban landscape. Artificial turf offers none of the natural advantages of grass or even dirt - cooling the air, absorbing and filtering rainwater and offering foraging spots for migrating birds.

Unlike grass fields, which cool the surrounding air by reflecting sunlight and evaporating water, artificial fields absorb and reradiate the sun's heat. Synthetic turf fields are some of the hottest places in the city, said Dr. Stuart Gaffin, associate research scientist at the Center for Climate Systems Research at Columbia University, who discovered this from NASA satellite maps when doing research on the urban heat island effect.

Over the last two summers, researchers visited the hot spots identified in the maps and measured just how hot the city's synthetic turf fields can get: as high as 130 to 140 degrees Fahrenheit. Synthetic turf is hotter than asphalt, said Gaffin.

This could have a particularly negative impact on temperatures in communities where a significant amount of natural surface is replaced by synthetic turf. One such example is the area around the new Yankee Stadium. The stadium occupies the site of Macombs Dam Park, a 20-acre rectangle that formerly contained well-worn soccer and baseball fields and a running track and was bordered by hundreds of mature trees. To replace some of that park's facilities, the city will build an artificial turf soccer field and track on top of a parking garage.

Another consideration is the impact of artificial turf on the city's combined sewage overflows. In most of the city's sewer system, storm runoff combines with household sewage. During huge downpours, sewage treatment plants cannot handle the added rainwater, and untreated waste overflows into the harbor and rivers. Grass and dirt soak up rain, but synthetic turf fields, which are designed to drain quickly, very efficiently funnel rainwater into the sewage system.

Replacing natural fields with synthetic turf runs counter to the city's goal of increasing natural areas and permeable surfaces as a way to reduce stormwater runoff. This strategy is part of Mayor Bloomberg's sustainability blueprint, and likely to be included in the stormwater management plan the city is required to adopt by the end of the year.

"If New York is serious about becoming a greener, more livable city by employing reasonable, cost-effective and environmentally sound stormwater management techniques, then the installation of artificial turf fields needs to be significantly curbed, if not halted altogether, " Craig Michaels, an investigator with the environmental group Riverkeeper said in testimony at a December hearing before the City Council Committee on Parks and Recreation.

Another Alternative?

The Trust for Public Land, which has used crumb rubber-based turf at the 18 public school playgrounds it has transformed into community parks, has said it will switch to a different type of turf for future projects, the Daily News reported.

The parks department, however, has not suspended its use of synthetic turf with rubber infill, said Abramson, and opposes the proposed legislation to establish a moratorium on its use. However, he added, "As the technology advances, we are exploring alternative options, including carpet-style turf."

Given the realities of continued heavy demand for sports fields and limited funding for maintenance, synthetic fields seem here to stay. But advocates say the city needs to look more carefully at the full costs and the health and environmental effects, use synthetic turf where it is needed, such as on soccer fields that get the most wear and tear, and develop better maintenance strategies for grass baseball fields. They also call on the city to formally mitigate the installation of synthetic turf by creating new green space nearby.

"We live in a particular urban environment, and climate changes are going to make things worse," said Gaffin. "The last thing we need is to exacerbate it with our own urban planning decisions."

Anne Schwartz, in charge of the parks topic page since its inception in 1999, is a journalist who specializes in environmental issues.

Schools Construction Project Nixes Use of Artificial Turf Made from Ground Tires by Adam Lisberg - NY Daily News

Read original...

At Thomas Jefferson Park in East Harlem Wednesday, a group of 13-year-olds playing football said they had no idea they were tackling each other on groundup tires.

A controversial type of artificial turf made of pulverized tires will no longer be used in a $25 million city school playground construction project because of concerns about possible health hazards.

The Trust for Public Land has used "crumb rubber infill" turf at 18 city playgrounds, but will switch to a different turf at the next seven it builds.

"We're moving away from the crumb rubber," the group's Troy Farmer told the Daily News. "There's really no firm evidence that there's anything to be frightened of, but as long as people are concerned, better safe than sorry."

The move puts new pressure on the Parks Department, which insists the turf is safe despite growing concern from parents and health advocates that the true risks are unknown. A bill in Albany would put a six-month moratorium on its use.

Crumb rubber infill turf uses tiny bits of recycled tires to cushion the spaces between blades of green artificial grass, with tens of thousands of pounds being used in an average field.

"There are millions of these [tiny bits]," said critic Geoffrey Croft of NYC Park Advocates. "They are flying up in people's faces. People are eating them. They wind up in the wash."

The tires contain heavy metals like lead and cadmium as well as volatile organic compounds and other chemicals, but there is no consensus about whether they are unsafe.

The city Health Department contends that "health risks are unlikely from exposure to the levels of chemicals found in the turf," but is sponsoring a review of scientific studies about it. The $100,000 report, paid for by the New York Community Trust, is expected to be released in the spring.

Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe has repeatedly said the department has no plans to stop using crumb rubber infill turf, citing the Health Department's position.

Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, who unsuccessfully pushed Benepe last year for a scientific analysis of the groundup tires, said the city needs to change course.

"Even as evidence began to suggest that artificial turf may pose health risks, the Parks Department continued to make plans to install dozens more artificial turf fields," Gotbaum said. "The city has a responsibility to protect children from harm."

At Thomas Jefferson Park in East Harlem Wednesday, a group of 13-year-olds playing football said they had no idea they were tackling each other on groundup tires.

"That makes me not want to play here anymore," said Michael Valentin.

Not everyone was as concerned at Brooklyn's Cadman Plaza, though, where several parents said the turf was better than the ripped-up grass it replaced.

"I have no problem with my kids playing here," said Andrew Cribb, 50, who was playing soccer with 13-year-old Esme and 6-year-old Vivian. "It's a great improvement over the mud puddle it used to be."

alisberg@nydailynews.com

With Amanda Coleman and Lindsay Greene