Neil deMause

New York’s new public advocate, former city councilmember (and Hillary Clinton campaign director) Bill de Blasio, has been mostly talk since his election last fall — but for city’s “ombudsman,” speaking loudly might be the most effective tool of all. (And no, I’m not exactly sure what the headline means, though I hope it involves Mike Bloomberg as Simon Bar Sinister.)

When the New York Times delivered its all-important endorsement to then-City Councilman Bill de Blasio in last year’s race for public advocate, the paper noted that the winner’s chief task would be “demonstrating whether this position truly serves New Yorkers.”

If the subtext wasn’t clear then, it was brought into sharp focus when the mayor’s charter revision commission announced that its agenda for this year would include the possible elimination of the public advocate position… [read more]

Now that New York City’s comptroller has charged that the city’s development arm illegally withheld $125 million in revenues from the city treasury, does he actually have a shot at getting it back?

Comptroller John Liu’s finding that the Economic Development Corporation (EDC) had shortchanged the city treasury by $125 million raises the question of whether the comptroller can force the EDC to return the monies.

Asked at a telephone press briefing on Wednesday if he’d use his power to refuse to sign off on city contracts to compel EDC to pass the money along (EDC, though effectively a branch of the mayor’s office, is technically a non-profit corporation that contracts with the city to do economic development), Liu replied: “I hope it doesn’t need to get any further beyond this point,” adding: “We will use every authority we have in this office, and I imagine the mayor will do the same thing, to get that $125 million.”

It seems unlikely, however, that the mayor will have Liu’s back, since two mayoral agencies have already signed off on the EDC’s practice… [read more]

Fun with Google caching!

Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion is “in hot water” after blurting out to Yale students that he’d already been picked for a top job in the Obama administration, as well as the target of “an anti-Adolfo e-mail campaign” to Obama’s change.gov by Bronx residents upset by his role in the Yankee Stadium controversy, according to a story by Daily News Bronx editor Bob Kappstatter. Wrote one angry Bronxite: “If he runs for a dog catcher, we will campaign against him and support the dogs.”

At least, that’s what you would have read on the Daily News website at 2:16 am, when it was posted. By this afternoon, the story, headlined “Adolfo Carrion under fire,” had disappeared from the Daily News site… [read more]

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got his way last week when the city council voted to overturn term limits and allow him to run for a third term. He should be careful what he wishes for.

When Fiorello LaGuardia was elected to a third term in 1941, he was still widely considered New York’s greatest mayor ever. When Robert Wagner followed suit 20 years later, he won in a landslide. Ed Koch won a third term with 78 percent of the vote, at a time when he was being touted as a potential presidential candidate.

Four years later, each of them was gone in disgrace… [read more]

In case you haven’t heard, New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg is pulling out all the stops to change the city’s term-limits law so he can seek a third term in office. The city council held public hearings last Thursday and Friday, and I dropped in for a visit:

Last week’s City Council hearings on term limits were, to put it nicely, a fiesta of convoluted arguments and strange bedfellows. Starting with the three competing options on the floor — lift the eight-year limit by council fiat, hold a special voter referendum or leave things as is — things only got more surreal as advocates of each position tried to explain why their side, and not the other guy’s, represented the “will of the people.”… [read more]

The Metro website is still apparently running on autopilot, so you’ll need to consult the PDF version to see my column from this Monday. The topic, once again, is all the ways New York City spends money without telling anyone:

Last Monday, I noted in this space that while the city council is raked over the coals for handing out millions of dollars in “member items” to favored groups, the mayor doles out billions from the city budget with even less oversight. Over the next three days, the following news items appeared:

When Mayor Bloomberg and then-Gov. Pataki cut a deal in 2005 to give Goldman Sachs about $400 million for a new downtown Manhattan headquarters, they also agreed to give the firm another $321 million if there were delays rebuilding Ground Zero. No one involved thought to mention this to the public… [read more]

I neglected to post here about this Monday’s Metro NY column, but then, Metro has neglected to post it to their site yet, either. (Or update their site at all this week, for that matter.) You can read the PDF version here; a taste of what it’s about:

If you’re a New Yorker frustrated with the workings of our local government it’s hard not to be gleeful at news that lawyer Norman Siegel has sued for a judicial inquiry into the city council “Slushgate” scandal. The suit, based on a 19th-century city charter provision enacted after legendary account-padder Boss Tweed funneled half the city treasury to his cronies, is a longshot; still, it’s fun to picture council speaker Christine Quinn being hauled before a judge to explain why she thought allocating council funds to nonexistent groups was a bright idea.

Cheap thrills aside, though, many budget watchers say the council scandal is penny-ante stuff compared to the tried and true way for elected officials to spend money with little to no public oversight: the New York City budget… [read more]