Shawn Morris 2009

A Win for Democracy and Immigrants

There’s an adage that goes around legislative circles that “democracy works…not the way it’s supposed to, but it works.”

 

I thought of that during Monday night’s Common Council meeting, when the legislative process did work the way we would like it to...  At issue was a resolution supporting immigrant rights in the City of Albany. 

To the Common Council’s credit, legislation supporting civil rights generally receives unanimous support and sponsorship.  What made this resolution a little more controversial was a “Resolved” that encouraged public safety personnel to refrain from asking about an individual’s immigrant status in the course of their interactions.  This raised some concerns as to whether the Council was asking law enforcement to overlook the law.

 

It’s important to note that that was never the intent of the resolution’s sponsor, Barbara Smith. In fact, she added a sentence to underscore that this resolution in no way encouraged people to live in Albany without the appropriate documentation. Practically speaking, once someone breaks the law, even for a traffic violation, their immigrant status becomes readily known. But public safety personnel also interact with crime victims and witnesses, as well as those in need of emergency medical care.  That clause works to encourage those individuals to seek help or cooperate with an investigation.

Nonetheless, several Councilmembers were squeamish, and a fairly comprehensive discussion in caucus did little to assuage their concerns. 

 

The Common Council opens its meetings with a public comment period.  Several people spoke on the issue: a recent immigrant from the Congo; a political science professor from UAlbany; a Center Square resident who is active in a church which serves an immigrant community; and a local immigration activist.  With different perspectives, they spoke eloquently and passionately on the plight of both the documented and undocumented immigrant.  They acknowledged the failure of the federal government to assess and deal with the issue in a humane and comprehensive manner.  They asked the council to view the issue with compassion.

Later in the meeting, the surprise happened. Several members spoke to the merits of the resolution.  Then, those who, in caucus, had indicated opposition stood.  They said they had changed their minds, that they had listened to what people had to say.  They had heard their colleagues’ thoughts and concerns.  They voted yes; the resolution passed unanimously.

 

It seems a small thing on the surface.  But in an age when political discourse pivots on hyperbole and polarization, it was significant.  On the anniversary of the first moon walk, it was indeed a small step for the Common Council, but a giant leap for public discourse.

The Mayor's Special Friends

Today's Times Union story entitled "The Mayor's Special Friends" outlines the heart of the problem with the way City Hall functions: namely that the Jennings administration has been plagued with cronyism, favoritism and ethical lapses.   It does matter what the Mayor, his police chief and com missioners do outside of working hours…especially when it may violate the Public Officers' law.  It does matter who contributes large sums to the Mayor's war chest, especially when it results in special favors.

 

This “pay to play” atmosphere has pervaded Albany city government for too long.  It costs the tax payers millions and stifles participation that will move Albany forward.  It has led to a cynical view of our city that holds it back.    It has to change.

 

Under my leadership, the city’s books and its contracting will be open for public view,  our processes will be transparent and inclusive.  We will have one set of rules for everyone.  And we will have an ethics law with teeth in it. 

 

Albany has so much potential to be the city in the Capital Region that people want to live in, work in, and raise their families in. We’ll reach that potential when there is leadership that is open, fair and focused on creating vibrant neighborhoods, instead of campaign war chests.

The Mayor's Solid Waste Plan STINKS

Albany will yet again expand its landfill; an expansion that could have -- and should have -- been avoided with planning and leadership from the current mayor.  Over the years, Councilmembers have questioned the city’s recycling: asking why the city hasn’t enforced recycling requirements on the state offices, local institutions, businesses or apartment buildings that contract privately.  We are now realizing the full effects of the Mayor's neglect.

"Recycling" was becoming a household word and habit over fifteen years ago. If the Jennings' administration had worked with our businesses, institutions and residents to reduce our solid waste and increase our recycling, we would be having a much different discussion today. If they had worked on plans to keep trash out of the landfill, instead of filling it up, we would be working on different issues today.

This is another area in which too much authority and not enough oversight is handed to the Mayor’s office in Albany, without the checks and balances that good government requires.  The Common Council should have the authority to approve waste fees, and receive regular reports on the income and fill rate at the landfill.  There should be regular audits of any taxpayer owned enterprise that results in a high level of revenue.  And we need to engage all our city’s citizens, both residents and visitors, on increasing what we recycle and how we recycle it:  from cans to paper to organic matter. 

The city has derived income from the landfill, income that paid for city expenses.  But it was done in a shortsighted manner: giving some private companies (contributors?) great prices so they would dump more; not requiring institutions to recycle; not working with the state to reduce what was coming out of the very agencies that regulate the process.  

 

So now, instead of planning for the next level of waste management, we are faced with the current no-win situation, for which the Mayor is responsible: choosing between financial solvency or expanding a landfill in an environmentally fragile area.  It is a prime example of how damaging irresponsible planning and poor budgeting can be.

 

 

 

Just Make a Plan

In my house, “you have to have a plan” is something of a mantra. What do you need to do, how will you do it, how much time does it take, what’s it going to cost, how are you paying for it? The mantra is repeated for everything from going away for the weekend to going to college.

 

That’s why the city’s lack of long term planning for some of our most important issues is so frustrating. And more frustrating is laying out a plan that then sits on a shelf.

 

The city needs to plan, and then implement the plan. We are an old city, with old infrastructure.  Our streets and sidewalks are in rough shape.  Our water delivery system is old, our sewers are inadequate. And ultimately, we need to shape our communities, residential and business alike, to meet the needs and wants of a 21st century city.

 

In the past couple weeks, a few issues have illuminated this need: the latest round of flooded homes following this month's rain, last week's meeting on developing a bicycle plan, the ongoing problems with solid waste disposal.

 

The problems associated with these issues could have been mitigated or even eliminated by an honest evaluation of the problem years ago, followed by a good measured plan that started “chipping away” at the budget constraints. Taxpayers wouldn’t be hit with a big bill all at once, and there is a lowering of frustration levels when residents see that something will be done, when you can see the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel.

 

Instead, our city tends toward denial and living in the moment. Fill the landfill quickly for the revenues, then scramble when there’s no time or room left. Spend years claiming the sewers just need a good cleaning, when it’s obvious the system is antiquated and inadequate.  Brush off the bicycle riders until election year, then rev up a planning process that can’t take advantage of the surge in infrastructure stimulus funds that are available now.

 

Planning is important, it saves money, it lets taxpayers know what is in the pipeline, and it gives citizens a stronger voice in setting priorities. It makes it possible to move ahead on a project that has been publicly vetted if, when, funding suddenly becomes available.

 

In the coming days, I will discuss several issues that could have been dealt with better if the important long term planning had been done, if the public had been engaged in the process, if the city administration had been open and transparent about how they were dealing with the issue.  What do you think about the current administration's planning?

Good Government Thrives on Public Input and Transparency

Good government is about playing by the rules, rules that apply to everyone, rules that make sure government is open and transparent about how it spends public money.

Good government is inclusive; it includes all branches of government and reaches out to the public to be sure citizens have the information they need to have a voice in government.

The Jennings administration has a hard time playing by the rules.  This week saw evidence of that when the city’s planning commissioner failed to show up at a meeting scheduled specifically for him, to discuss the city’s plan for nearly $1 million in additional community development funds being made available through the federal stimulus package.

Ironically, one of the requirements of drawing down stimulus funds is that there is adequate public input and participation in how the funds are spent.  This is why it is important, particularly for community development projects.

These funds are important to reclaiming neighborhoods from blight: blocks with as many vacant as occupied buildings. Neighborhoods with few businesses like grocery stores or pharmacies providing necessities.  Few resident homeowners providing that important base that helps a community thrive. These are the kind of issues Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) are supposed to address.

A city can’t arrive at the right solutions to these problems without engaging the people who live there, the people who do business there, and the people elected to represent those communities in setting the priorities. When the plans include tearing down buildings, providing for job training, investing tax dollars in rebuilding, the people who live there have a right to be in on it, and the city has the responsibility to include them in a timely, comprehensive manner.

Now the city has drawn up a plan for spending that money.  But they haven’t shared it with the Common Council, as the rules say they should.  They put an outline of the plan somewhere on the city website.  Unfortunately, most of the people who live in the affected communities don’t have access to the internet.  I also heard that they “advertised” in the newspaper.  I didn’t see it, and well, neither did virtually anyone in the affected communities.

This needs  to change.

Albany has a strong network of well-informed, engaged citizens and organizations.  Make use of it. Respect the rest of government, respect the citizens.  Play by the rules.

It’s good government.

One City, Two Sets of Rules

It turns out that Albany Police Chief James Tuffey should not have been carrying hand guns for the past 10 years.  And he reportedly owns three guns.   

 

Whoops.

 

That’s basically the reaction of Mayor Jennings.  It doesn’t matter.

 

It turns out that the Chief is no longer certified to be a police officer, and didn’t know it. 

 

Whoops.

 

It doesn’t matter, because he is an “administrator” of the department.

 

Shouldn’t the administrator of a department be aware of how police officers are certified or when someone needs a handgun permit?  Shouldn’t those be two important details to keep track of in a city with over 300 police officers and a problem with gun violence? It does matter. 

 

It matters because this is just another episode in a long story of "One City, Two Sets of Rules."

 

A police department assistant chief organizes the illegal purchase of machine guns for private possession, violating all sorts of federal, state and local laws. When discovered, the next generation of command staff quietly tries to fix the problem.  There are at least 6 machine guns “out there” somewhere still registered to the Albany Police Department.

 

That matters.

 

City employees sell city scrap metal privately.  Parking violations are selectively enforced. And there are no repercussions. That matters.

 

 The house cited because of peeling paint under the eaves looks across the street at a "perfectly legal” house with cracked windows and a crumbling porch.

 

One city, two sets of rules.  One set for the Mayor and his friends, one set for the rest of us.

 

That has to change, because it matters to the thousands of Albany residents who are concerned about violence in their city. 

 

It matters to the neighborhood activists who spend hundreds of hours a year trying to keep absentee landlords from driving them out of their community and to the homeowners denied insurance because of the vacant buildings on their block.

It matters to every taxpayer who is stunned by what it costs them every year to live in the city.

 

“You know, it’s like we get penalized just for living here,” a Mansion Neighborhood resident said to me the other day.

 

We need one set of rules for the whole city. Feed the meter or pay the ticket.  Fix the front porch or lose the occupancy permit.  Know the laws you are enforcing, and obey them yourself.

 

One city, one set of rules.  Because it matters.

 

Welcome to My Blog

Welcome to my blog at Metroland.  I look forward to a lively discussion of the issues confronting Albany, and what we can do to make it the 21^st century city we know it can be.  I invite your comments, your ideas and, yes, even your criticism.

I have one rule:  civility.  Agree, disagree, criticize or praise, but rude and snide remarks are likely to get deleted, and those that are downright nasty or suggestive of violence or retaliation definitely will be.

Let me tell you a little bit about myself.  I am the President of Albany’s Common Council, the legislative branch of city government.  Before being elected president, I served as the Councilmember from the 7^th Ward, which includes the Delaware and New Scotland Avenue neighborhoods. And, this year, I am running for Mayor. 

I have always put a focus on our city neighborhoods: working to increase community voices in government; strengthening the laws around code enforcement and vacant buildings; advocating for safe streets through community policing; building bridges between residents, businesses and institutions.

And I am running for Mayor because we need a change in leadership to get Albany on the right track.  We need to restore trust in City Government by ensuring that there’s one set of rules for all; we need to eliminate the 'pay to play' culture; and we need to increase citizen participation and engagement.

Together, we can find real solutions to the challenges we face. I look forward to hearing what you have to say.  Comment on my postings, on others’ comments or introduce a topic of your own. This is "open mic" on Albany -- and we're open 24/7.