Press Room

"Juneteenth is meant to be a celebration of freedom historically and progress today. But right now, with both government and societal forces denying that history and reversing that progress, it can be hard to celebrate as a Black American.  "When leaders from Washington to New York view diversity, equity, and inclusion as something to eliminate rather than celebrate, when both the heroes and the harms of our history are being erased, it can be hard to celebrate.  "When we are barely clinging to the gains of the past decades, instead of continuing forward toward equity, it can be hard to celebrate. Enslaved people in Texas did not learn of their freedom until two years after it had been declared. Black Americans today are still waiting for true liberation. "Liberation tears down systems of injustice propped up by the powerful, regardless of their race. As we have seen, and are currently experiencing, it’s not enough for Black individuals to advance and amass power if that power is not also for the people, that advancement for the movement.  "And yet – we still celebrate today. We celebrate the principles we fight for, the people who have fought, the people still fighting. We celebrate the perseverance of our ancestors and the resilience of our neighbors. We celebrate the spirit that will keep us marching on 'til victory is won."

"The scenes of state violence and overreach in Los Angeles should alarm every American– but not for the reasons that right-wing media and leaders would have us believe. Donald Trump is again expanding his mass deportation machine, beyond 'gangs' or 'violent criminals' and into our neighborhoods. 

"We have a moral obligation to stand up in defense of our immigrant communities. We have a moral obligation to lead with love for our neighbors, to channel our fear and anger into love and action on behalf of the families the Trump administration is targeting. Trump’s deploying of the National Guard and Marines against protesters is a call to action for people of conscience. He wants chaos, and we do not have to give it to him – but we have to stand up. 

"I believe in Kingian strategies for advancing justice – primarily, for nonviolent demonstration, and yes, strategic civil disobedience. Nonviolent does not mean sedate – to be passive in this moment is to be complicit. People with power and privilege have an obligation to use it to protect the vulnerable, and Donald Trump’s assault on our immigrant communities has compounded into an assault on dissent. 

"We know that this is Donald Trump’s plan for our city as well – he’s already begun his crackdown on dissent, and it can only escalate. What I don’t know is whether Eric Adams will do anything at all to protect New Yorkers from detention and disappearance. The mayor has already shown that he is much more offended by the idea of protest than the harm those protests are trying to prevent. While he found his voice on immigration under President Biden, his absolute alliance to MAGA, his silence, and his capitulation to all things Trump are disgraceful. If he and his top deputies side with their golf buddy, Donald Trump, over the rights and safety of New Yorkers, it will be a dereliction of duty – but also par for the course."

NEW YORK: As the MTA is in court seeking to block the Trump administration from retaliatory cuts to the city’s transit funding over its congestion pricing, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams has released a review of the first four months of the policy being in place. The review highlights the many successes achieved in the early implementation, and provides recommendations moving forward, standing against any efforts by the federal government to undo the progress made.

“Donald Trump doesn’t decide what’s best for our city’s streets,” said New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams. “His efforts to reverse the progress we’ve made in implementing congestion pricing amount to blackmailing our city, undermining the public transit system that New Yorkers rely on. The early data is clear that congestion pricing is reducing travel times and traffic. I’ve always said that adjustments can and should be considered as implementation continues, and I hope to work with city and state leaders to monitor and improve congestion pricing as it moves forward – and it will move forward, no matter what Donald Trump says.”

Public Advocate Williams is currently on a 5-Boro Transit Tour, using a range of public transportation to travel all five boroughs while speaking directly to New Yorkers about the improvements to transit that they need, and where they believe transportation funding should be distributed, and the consequences federal cuts would have.

“The Trump administration is trying to pull federal funding for transportation projects at a time when we need to be investing in improving our systems, not grinding them to a halt,” added the Public Advocate. “New Yorkers who are on our trains, buses, and ferries every day know what we need, and they’re who I’m going to listen to when it comes to how to strengthen our public transportation infrastructure and improve travel all across the five boroughs. Someone needs to stand up for our city in this moment.”

The Office of the Public Advocate’s new review points to early successes of congestion pricing in reducing average traffic and travel times. An average decrease of 7.5% - 16% in daily traffic with weekday average trips on bridges and tunnels showing a 10% - 30% reduction in traveling time can already be seen. It also notes the improvements in public opinion about congestion pricing, now that the benefits are becoming clear and the worst predictions failing to appear.

Crucially, the review finds a 12.69% decrease in vehicular crashes below 60th Street, comparing data from 2024 and 2025 during the periods between January 5 and May 5. There has also been a 8.75% drop in injuries and fatalities during the same period. Based on the available data the dramatic effect that congestion pricing has on the lives of New Yorkers is clear.

Moving forward, the review offers several measures to maximize effectiveness. Among the recommendations are:

• Investing fully in the Interborough Express (IBX) & MTA’s 2025-2029 Capital Program.
• Creating Low Emission Zones (LEZs)
• Signage and modifications on the Ed Koch Queensboro Bridge
• Prioritizing alternative forms of trucking, such as Blue Highways.
• Supporting QueensLink for better transit options.
• Accommodating low-income drivers.
• Prioritizing Staten Island’s MTA needs.

The Trump administration has threatened to cease construction authorizations and approvals for projects – first in Manhattan, then citywide – unless the city and state back down.

As the legal cases surrounding congestion pricing continue, so too will the policy and the revenue it generates, and as this review emphasizes, the Public Advocate will continue to monitor implementation and propose adjustments to maximize its success in supporting New Yorkers. Read the full review here.

"On my transit tour today, I heard a clear message from New Yorkers across all five boroughs: We need to be investing more in our system, not cutting vital funding.

"Today’s ruling will temporarily protect against Donald Trump blackmailing passengers in New York City’s trains, buses, ferries, and bike lanes. Hopefully, the federal government will use this opportunity to see the successes of congestion pricing so far — as our report illustrates — and hear the voices of the New Yorkers they claim to stand for."

"Congressman Rangel has earned a celebrated place in history, and that place has to be Harlem— the community he loved and served throughout his entire life. The Lion of Lenox Avenue is also its pride. His decades of public service had enormous impact that extended beyond Harlem’s corners, throughout our city and nation. An honored veteran before his time in office, a co-founder of the Congressional Black Caucus, he led through difficult moments with resolve and humanity.

"Representative Rangel served as an inspiration for New York’s Black community as the last living member of the influentialGang of Four, helping to shape the generations of Black leadership that followed him into government. As we grieve his passing and pray with his family and neighbors, we resolve to learn lessons from and build upon his legacy."

On Monday, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams appeared before the 'NYC Commission to Strengthen Local Democracy' Charter Revision Commission at a public hearing to discuss his proposed amendments to the charter in this cycle. At the hearing, he testified in favor of proposals which would help create transparency and accountability, including through strengthening the investigative powers of the Office of the Public Advocate. 

“While the Charter is a living document that has grown and changed, just as our city has grown and changed, the language governing the Public Advocate’s abilities has not kept pace,” Public Advocate Williams noted, and proposed two recommendations related to the Public Advocate’s office – first, to grant the role full subpoena power, thus better allowing it to fulfill its duties as mandated and helping to avoid lengthy and expensive lawsuits to receive information which the city should readily share between governing partners. The Public Advocate also petitioned for Charter clarification that would codify greater standing to sue on behalf of the residents of New York City.

He pointed to recent controversies as evidence of the need for Charter clarification, that “The Governor recently acknowledged that in the current climate of corruption and the appearance of corruption that the citywide elected officials in NYC should have the ability to hire independent counsel and have standing to sue.”

These changes are essential, he argued, given the failures of administrations to comply with requests, noting the history of this issue “The Charter states that the Office of the Public Advocate 'shall have timely access to those records and documents of city agencies which the public advocate deems necessary to complete the investigations, inquiries and reviews.'” However, city agencies currently fail to comply with these requests to no consequence in the absence of a subpoena.”

As an official charged with ensuring government provides transparency and accountability, he also urged changes to strengthen other city oversight bodies. These include establishing that “The NYC Board of Corrections (BOC) should receive a minimum budget tied to 1% of the expense budget of the Department of Corrections.” Similarly, he called for the Civilian Complaint Review Board to receive 1% of the NYPD’s budget, as well as direct access to body-worn camera footage and allowing final approval of disciplinary authority decisions to rest with the CCRB, not just the NYPD Commissioner.

The Public Advocate's full statement as delivered is below and the hearing can be viewed here. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS TO THE NEW YORK CITY NYC COMMISSION TO STRENGTHEN LOCAL DEMOCRACY MAY 19, 2025

Peace and blessings, love and light to everyone. As mentioned, my name is Jumaane D. Williams, and I have the pleasure of serving as Public Advocate for the City of New York. Before I jump in, I want to thank all of you in this room – the Chair, Commission Members, and fellow New Yorkers – for your participation in this open, transparent, publicly noticed process to make government better and fairer.

The Office of the Public Advocate acts as a watchdog to ensure that City agencies are as efficient and effective as demanded by the people of New York as set forth in section 24 of the New York City Charter. The office also investigates and resolves constituent complaints relating to the services provided by these agencies. 

As the second highest-ranking elected official in the City, however, my ability to fully serve New Yorkers can be undermined by the existing language in the Charter. While the Charter is a living document that has grown and changed, just as our city has grown and changed, the language governing the Public Advocate’s abilities has not kept pace. I ask the Commission to consider and solicit feedback concerning a mechanism through which the Public Advocate can require officials and agencies to answer questions posed by the Public Advocate, whether that mechanism be some form of subpoena power or otherwise.

To that end I make two recommendations respective to the Office of the Public Advocate. First is regarding subpoena power. As I raised in my statement to the 2019 Charter Commission, the Charter states that the Office of the Public Advocate “shall have timely access to those records and documents of city agencies which the public advocate deems necessary to complete the investigations, inquiries and reviews.” However, city agencies could fail to comply with these requests to no consequence in the absence of a subpoena, which would delay investigations that the Office of the Public Advocate are required to conduct. Giving the office full subpoena power would better allow the office to fulfill its duties as mandated by the existing Charter. This would avoid lengthy and expensive lawsuits to receive information the city should be sharing between agencies, the only current remedy. The Charter also allows that the Public Advocate may hold public hearings but is silent as to whether the Public Advocate may require witnesses to attend and testify at these hearings, a noticeable gap subpoena power would fill.

Additionally I’d like to call attention to the need regarding standing to sue. In 2019 I also gave testimony on an essential power for independence and to best represent the people of New York City not afforded to the Office of the Public Advocate- Standing to Sue. The Charter does not make clear Public Advocate’s standing to sue on behalf of the residents of New York City. Because the Law Department has determination over which officials with the Office of the Public Advocate independent from mayoral agencies. Clarifying the clear standing to sue would improve transparency and accountability in New York City. The Governor recently acknowledged that in the current climate of corruption and the appearance of corruption that the citywide elected officials in NYC should have the ability to hire independent counsel and have standing to sue.

I would also like to address ways the Charter can support external and independent review of our law enforcement bodies. Right now we are in the earliest stages of remediation tasked with addressing the administration’s inability to effectively manage ongoing violence in NYC Jails, but like Rikers, the court-led oversight will not last forever. We must look to the future. The NYC Board of Corrections (BOC) should receive a minimum budget tied to 1% of the expense budget of the Department of Corrections. This would allow for fulfillment of their charter mandated duty to perform oversight of the Department of Corrections and is consistent with recommendations from numerous entities including the American Bar Association. An investment into the BOC has serious benefits to the city that include averting financial risk from lawsuits whose causes can be identified and addressed earlier, independently identifying and substantiating DOC needs for funding, and allowing for better informed decisions relative to sentencing and facility policies. 

Changing the composition of the Board of Corrections from majority mayoral appointments would also allow for independence between agencies.

The city’s other law enforcement oversight body, the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) is similarly understaffed. Setting a minimum budget for the Civilian Complaint Review Board tied to 1% of the expense budget of the New York City Police Department would correct this. As a workforce responsible for performing oversight for the largest police force in the nation it makes sense that their budget be tied proportionally as it is in other major cities like Chicago and Miami. Allowing for direct access to the CCRB for body-worn camera footage and other relevant materials would avoid delays and allow for timely decisions increasing public confidence in the process. Finally, allowing final approval of disciplinary authority decisions to rest with the CCRB and not just the NYPD Commissioner is crucial to ensure accountability for police misconduct, and should be considered as well. Thank you very much.