Press Room

NEW YORK: As the New York City Council is set to vote today on Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams’ bill to ban solitary confinement in New York City jails, and the administration continues to spread misinformation about the bill, the New York Daily News has published his op-ed entitled 'Banning solitary is saving lives.'

In the piece, the Public Advocate highlights the realities of solitary and the lifelong damages the punitive measure causes for individuals, writing that “By no definition is this “correction.” It’s just convenient cruelty… People in solitary are denied human contact and connection, denied support, and come out of these deplorable conditions worse than when they went in – and some, like Brandon Rodriguez and Layleen Polanco don’t come out at all.”

As the administration and others have perpetuated misinformation about the bill the Public Advocate further discusses the reality of the bill, explaining that “Our bill does not prevent removing someone from a situation where they are dangerous to themselves or others. Instead, it makes clear the process for doing so, and the minimum standards of humanity that system must follow. It puts in place a system of separation and de-escalation – not one of isolation…Put simply – committing an infraction in jail can cause you to lose privileges, not basic human rights.”

In closing, he argues in support of the legislation that “The fear-mongering around this bill is disingenuous, bordering on absurd… Solitary is inhumane – morally unjust, societally inexcusable, and practically ineffective at all but inflicting pain. It makes our jails less safe, and it makes our city less safe. The opponents of this bill, the opponents of banning solitary, are trying to uphold a status quo of inhumanity, and hiding their effort in misinformation,” urging that the city finally ban solitary confinement – not just in name, but in practice.

Full text of the op-ed is available below, and it can be viewed online here.

Banning Solitary is Saving Lives by Jumaane D. Williams, Public Advocate

If you ask the Adams administration, there is no solitary confinement in New York City’s jails. Or there is, but it’s called punitive segregation. Or wait, it’s not punitive, it’s for safety. Or hang on, we oppose solitary confinement morally, but we need it to keep Rikers safe. Or no, Rikers is unsafe and that’s why we can’t ban solitary confinement. Clearly?

The United Nations has designated solitary confinement as torture. But just across the East River, solitary confinement is still being used on Rikers Island, where pain is policy. There is a great deal of misinformation and misunderstanding about solitary in New York City, but the reality is no matter what terminology you use, people in custody awaiting trial are facing the cruel and unusual punishment of isolation, and carrying the damage of that treatment for the rest of their lives.

By no definition is this “correction.” It’s just convenient cruelty.

Many people who have spent time in solitary continue to suffer severely from debilitating trauma long after incarceration. They leave Rikers, but they still aren’t free.

People in solitary are denied human contact and connection, denied support, and come out of these deplorable conditions worse than when they went in — and some, like Brandon Rodriguez and Layleen Polanco don’t come out at all.

Despite what the mayor and Department of Correction argue, the city never stopped using solitary confinement. They just changed the name, hiding the practice as much in language as they do on an island, out of sight and out of mind. But our bill, scheduled for a City Council vote today, was crafted in collaboration with experts and people who have actually experienced this torture, as well as labor leadership, puts a ban in place that is clear, enforceable, and built on guidances that should already be in place.

The DOC has historically shirked oversight and accountability, creating loopholes that allow them to continue abusive practices like harmful isolation. Without clear, enforceable guidelines for what DOC can and cannot do to people in their custody, they will continue to create and exploit loopholes to maintain solitary by other names.

Our bill does not prevent removing someone from a situation where they are dangerous to themselves or others. Instead, it makes clear the process for doing so, and the minimum standards of humanity that system must follow. It puts in place a system of separation and de-escalation — not one of isolation. Our bill also presents the opportunity for programming aimed at rehabilitation and correction.

Put simply — committing an infraction in jail can cause you to lose privileges, not basic human rights. We can de-escalate conflict, and provide programs and resources to prevent future harm, or we can perpetuate it by inflicting irreparable harm to our fellow New Yorkers’ mental health. We can have the due process our legal system was founded on, or we can deny it.

No one is saying there shouldn’t be consequences for infractions in jails. But those consequences shouldn’t be carried for the rest of a person’s life. Most people detained on Rikers Island will at some point be returning to their communities. If the response to every misstep or harmful behavior is isolation, they will be unprepared for reentry. Right now, time spent in solitary is linked to increased violence in jails and increased rates of re-arrest — banning solitary is good for public safety.

The fear-mongering around this bill is disingenuous, bordering on absurd. If we prohibit torture on Rikers Island, argue opponents, then Rikers will be dangerous, in a state of crisis! But as we all know, their hysterical hypothetical is already ongoing.

The problems detractors attribute to this bill had been happening for years before it’s even passed. It is true that correction officers face real challenges and have valid fears of dangers on Rikers that must be rectified — but that is not connected to a ban on solitary which hasn’t happened yet, and won’t be caused by this prohibition.

Solitary is inhumane — morally unjust, societally inexcusable, and practically ineffective at all but inflicting pain. It makes our jails less safe, and it makes our city less safe.

The opponents of this bill, the opponents of banning solitary, are trying to uphold a status quo of inhumanity, and hiding their effort in misinformation. They want us to look away from the suffering. But people have been crying out in pain for too long, and our city has to finally hear their isolated voices in one moral mandate: ban solitary now.

###

"Today the city council passed key legislation, with veto-proof majorities, to advance the causes of justice, equity, and public safety. I thank them for their support of my bills to ban solitary confinement and advance transparency in policing, among other bills. This legislation will be transformative in advancing public safety and justice.

"Leading up to this vote, there was a concerted misinformation campaign that misled the public about what these bills will achieve. Instead of honestly engaging with the realities of the legislation and its impact, opponents invented imaginary legislation — then condemned it.

"Now that these bills have been passed, I hope that the administration will work with us to ensure they are enacted and implemented effectively. 

"We have a moral mandate to do all we can to end systemic injustices and inequities, to build policies that make New Yorkers safer. We can have better policing and safer streets at the same time. We can protect corrections officers and basic human rights at the same time.

"But if we don’t recognize these realities, we will never be able to make the changes we need. I ask the opponents of these bills to look back at the last time they opposed reforms, in 2013, and to not repeat the mistakes of decades past."

###

NEW YORK: The New York City Council will vote today on the ‘How Many Stops’ Act, key policing transparency and reform legislation. Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams is co-prime sponsor with Council Member Alexa Avilés of one half of the act, a bill which would provide vital reporting and transparency around stops conducted by the New York City Police Department. This information is crucial to collect data around the implementation and impact of police reform bills.

The legislation, Intro 586-A, would require the NYPD to log and report basic information on level one, two, and three investigative encounters between the police and civilians. Officers would report on the race, age, and gender of the New Yorker approached, any factors leading to the interaction, and its outcomes. This reporting can be accomplished through a brief smartphone survey, and does not apply to casual conversations with the community. This information is critical to prevent the practices that led to the abuse of stop, question, and frisk prior to passage of the Community Safety Act in 2013.

“Effectively producing public safety based on results, not hysteria, means getting critical information about whether and how policing reforms are being implemented on the ground in our communities. New Yorkers have a right to know this information, and elected officials have an obligation to create policies based on it to ensure community safety and prevent injustices,” said Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams on the bill. “Through simple reporting on NYPD stops, we can prevent the kinds of bias-based policing we’ve seen in the past, build trust in often over-policed areas, and continue the work that began a decade ago amid the height of stop, question, and frisk. We should all be working together for better policing and safer streets, and we can only do that if we have transparency about how police and civilians interact in our streets.”

Council Member Avilés said, “Today the City Council will vote on the How Many Stops Act (HMSA), a critical piece of legislation that will help our communities breathe a little easier.  HMSA will allow for policing data related to stops of New Yorkers at the hands of NYPD public information. This data will shed light on what many New Yorkers believe is a pattern of racial profiling from the NYPD and will help increase accountability and transparency.  The relationship between the NYPD and our communities has consistently been filled  with tension. With this higher standard of reporting we can begin to repair harm and establish a consistent structure of accountability. While this legislation will not resolve everything, I want to thank the families of victims of police violence who have worked tirelessly in pursuit of justice,  and we honor the memory of their loved ones with the passage of today’s legislation that will bring us closer to true community safety.”

Enacting this legislation will address issues of underreporting stops and ensure stops are legal and legitimate, as well as inform future policies. It furthers efforts of accountability and takes steps toward increasing trust between law enforcement and historically over-policed New Yorkers.

During the Bloomberg administration, the bias-based abuses of stop, question and frisk were ruled unconstitutional, and a federal monitor was put in place over the NYPD.   That monitor has recently reported an alarming rise in similar tactics, with 24% of stops considered unconstitutional and 97% of stops directed toward Black and Brown New Yorkers. Aggregating and assessing information about interactions on the streets is the most effective way to ensure that proper policies are in place and followed to establish better policing and safer streets, preventing the abuses of the past which saw more young Black men stopped in one year than lived in the city of New York at the time.

It was only through shared data that these abuses were addressed a decade ago, and as part of the Joint Remedial Process in the federal court ruling on stop, question, and frisk,  reporting on Level 1 and 2 stops, which is encompassed in today's legislation, was recommended to prevent future abuses.

Intro 586-A requires reporting only on “Level 1 and 2 investigative encounters,” defined in the NYPD Patrol Guide as interactions with a specific law enforcement or investigative purpose. Casual conversation, such as those which help strengthen community relations, are excluded from reporting. Reporting can also be accomplished in mere seconds on a smartphone, preventing undue burden.

“Deliberate efforts to mislead the public about this bill have created an environment of misinformation and misunderstanding – exactly the kind of confusion and conflict that hard data can combat,” continued Public Advocate Williams. “The How Many Stops Act merely requires quick reporting on investigatory stops, not every interaction. Whatever the fear mongering has fabricated, the reality is that this bill, crafted with NYPD input, merely requires sharing basic data on the number and nature of law enforcement stops. I believe that a department with the technological capabilities the NYPD has displayed will be able to do this reporting quickly and effectively.”

The second bill in the ‘How Many Stops’ Act, Intro 538, is sponsored by Council Member Crystal Hudson and requires the NYPD to report on instances in which an individual denies consent to a search.

“The How Many Stops Act is a common sense, good government package that will bring much-needed transparency to the NYPD,” said Council Member Crystal Hudson, Sponsor of Intro. 538. “I’m proud to have joined Public Advocate Williams, Council Member Avilés, and the scores of advocates, namely Justice Committee and Communities United for Police Reform, in the fight for the passage of this vital legislative package. We must assure our communities that the NYPD will be held accountable and that our City is committed to ending the culture of impunity and abuse that pervades the department. Once law, these bills will give New Yorkers a more complete picture of the police department's activities in our communities, mandating the full and accurate reporting of police interactions with the public, and ensuring the NYPD is adhering to the City’s Right to Know Act, creating safer communities for us all.”

The bill from the Public Advocate is one of five being voted on today, which also include legislation to ban solitary confinement, to streamline oversight access to police body camera footage, and to provide veterans with information about city services available to them.

###

1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East today announced its support for key City Council bills, sponsored by the Public Advocate, to ban solitary confinement in New York City jails and to require NYPD reporting on the number and nature of stops it conducts.

“1199SEIU strongly supports passage of Int. 549 and Int. 586 to protect the constitutional rights of all New Yorkers and ensure that justice is administered fairly and without racial bias. With NYPD stops again on the rise, it is crucial for the public to have access to data about how police interactions are impacting different demographics and communities throughout our city. And in city jails, we must end the cruel and inhumane practice of solitary confinement, which can cause irreparable, lifelong trauma and has been linked to self-harm and suicides. These reforms are long overdue and necessary to building a fairer and more effective criminal justice system,” said George Gresham, 1199SEIU President.

“1199SEIU is at the forefront of standing up for working people, for progress, and for justice,” said New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams. “Members of 1199 are working on Rikers every day to promote and preserve the safety and well-being of people on both sides of the bars, to support systems which make our jails and communities safer. They are committed to the health of our city and everyone in it. It's an honor to have their support in our movement to ban solitary – not just in name, but in practice – in our city. It is equally exciting to have their voices amplify the need for the How Many Stops Act, to provide transparency and allow for accountability in policing. Work that began over a decade ago to protect community safety with better policing is at a critical moment, and I’m proud to stand with 1199’s leadership and membership to get this done.”

Intro 549, sponsored by Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams and Council Member Carlina Rivera, would put in place an enforceable ban on solitary confinement in New York City jails. While the U.N. has designated solitary as torture, the practice of punitive isolation currently continues in the city under other names. The legislation has a veto-proof majority of Council Members as co-sponsors.

“We’re at a critical moment and have the opportunity to make our criminal legal system more just and humane. I am proud to sponsor legislation to ban solitary confinement and bring accountability to police interactions with the public, and commend 1199 SEIU for their public support of these bills that will advance true public safety” said Council Member Carlina Rivera, Chair of the Committee on Criminal Justice.

Intro 586, one half of the How Many Stops Act, is sponsored by Public Advocate Williams and Council Member Alexa Avilés. It would require the NYPD to report basic information on level one, two, and three investigative encounters between the police and civilians. This information is critical to prevent the practices that led to the abuse of stop, question, and frisk prior to passage of the Community Safety Act in 2013.

“Organized labor has a decades-spanning history championing civil rights causes,” said Council Member Alexa Avilés. “I’m grateful to see 1199 continue in that legacy with their endorsement of the How Many Stop Act. Everyone deserves to be treated with dignity from the shop floor to our city blocks. Thank you for standing with us in this fight to protect peoples’ rights and safety.”

1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East is the largest healthcare union in the country, representing some 200,000 healthcare workers in New York City and 450,000 across the East Coast.

New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams released the following statement about the How Many Stops Act, one bill of which he co-prime sponsors with Council Member Alexa Avilés. Read the facts on this legislation here.

"Ten years ago, I passed legislation curbing the abuses of stop, question, and frisk. But now, a federal monitor reports that similar tactics have been increasing in use on our streets. The How Many Stops Act is designed to prevent these abuses from returning by requiring reporting on investigatory stops – like questioning someone related to a suspected crime. It simply does not require reporting on every interaction, like casual conversation or asking for directions. Nor does it require recording of personal information like name and address in those interactions. This is a common sense way to get information about whether and how policing reforms are being implemented on the ground in our communities.

“I hope the conversation can center on what this bill actually does, not what people have put forth in bad faith and with bad information. 

“Whatever the fearmongering has fabricated, the reality is that this bill, crafted with NYPD input, merely requires sharing basic data on the number and nature of law enforcement stops. I believe that a department with the technological capabilities the NYPD has displayed will be able to do this reporting in a simple, rapid way that leads to better policing and safer streets.”

NEW YORK: Following the Wednesday release of Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams' 2023 Worst Landlord Watchlist, tenants, housing advocates, and elected officials have called for action to hold the most negligent landlords accountable and correct dangerous conditions in dilapidated buildings.

This year’s list, available here, was topped by Johnathan Santana, the designated head officer for infamous landlord Daniel Ohebshalom. Santana was also the #1 worst landlord on the list last year, and this year amassed the most open violations in the list’s history with a staggering 3293 open violations across 306 units in buildings on the list. Since Santana topped last year’s list, Ohebshalom has faced increased legal scrutiny, and settled three lawsuits with the city, totaling $4.2 million dollars.

In launching the list, Public Advocate Williams highlighted the recent success of tenants moving a neglected building that for years was in Johnathan Santana’s name and portfolio under Daniel Ohebshalom into an HPD rehabilitation program, out of the control of the worst landlord. He stressed that recent budget cuts and proposed further reductions will greatly inhibit enforcement actions to hold landlords accountable and deliver relief to tenants.

Video of the Public Advocate's remarks during the launch can be found here.

“It is so important to call out bad actor landlords by name for their gross negligence and apathy towards everyday New Yorkers.,” said Council Member Erik Bottcher. “One of the headliners on this year’s list is Daniel Ohebshalom, and in my district specifically we have fought Mr. Ohebshalom on buildings he owns in the Clinton Special Zoning District at 410 and 412 West 46th Street. Thankfully we just recently saw HPD win a lawsuit against him which appoints an administrator to fix up and activate these neglected buildings. It’s important for tenants to know who their landlord is, and if they are on this list. I urge everyone to read it, and am thankful to the Public Advocate for compiling it.”

"We're glad a spotlight is being shined on the worst landlords in New York City," said Mark Natanawan of Housing Conservation Coordinators. "The city and state need to redouble their efforts to protect tenants through enacting laws such as the LLC Transparency Act, Good Cause Eviction, and statewide Right To Counsel. We also urge our elected officials to pass COPA and TOPA legislation, so that buildings like 410 and 412 W. 46th Street have the opportunity to flourish again under community ownership."

"It is so infuriating to have to rapidly respond with both legal and financial support to stop evictions in Brooklyn, while tenants, especially elders of color, are living in utter squalor.  These landlords are so quick to haul people into courts for non-payment, yet refuse to make any repairs, provide working fridges or stoves, remove lead paint or mold in order to force tenants out of their homes. It's only after you've been evicted or forced out, will the landlord renovate the apartment so they can charge more money for it. These landlords need to be held accountable for all their violence and harm towards tenants." Imani Keith Henry, Lead Organizer, Equality for Flatbush

“Sunlight is the best disinfectant for exposing the unlawful and inhumane practices of predatory landlords,” said Aaron Carr, Founder and Executive Director of Housing Rights Initiative. “We commend Public Advocate Jumaane Williams for continuing to hold bad actors accountable and protecting the rights of vulnerable tenants across New York City.”

“The conditions these landlords subject low-income New Yorkers to is appalling, illegal and devoid of any decency and humanity,” said Judith Goldiner, Attorney-In-Charge of the Civil Law Reform Unit at The Legal Aid Society. “The Legal Aid Society lauds Public Advocate Jumaane Williams for producing the Worst Landlord Watchlist to better hold unscrupulous landlords accountable and to spotlight the plights that tenants throughout New York City, especially those from communities of color, are forced to endure each and every day.”

"When landlords critically neglect repairs and structural maintenance of their buildings--they put families and entire neighborhoods in danger,” said Sandra Lobo, Executive Director of the Northwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition. “We are acutely aware of that in the Bronx, where a building owned by David David with over 100 violations partially collapsed this week, displacing more than 100 tenants. The Northwest Bronx Community & Clergy Coalition is unwavering in its commitment to work with the NYC Public Advocate's office to pass legislation and enforcement to require HPD and landlords to inspect and remove hazardous violations immediately so that tenants can live in safety and dignity. We call on lenders to stop funding predatory landlords and enforce any clauses on mortgage agreements that push owners to keep properties up to code. And we are organizing so that residents have pathways to ownership over their buildings and land to ensure our neighborhoods are stable and can thrive over the long term."

"St Nicks Alliance applauds the Public Advocate for issuing the 2023 Worst Landlord List. The 2023 Worst Landlord List shed light on some of the landlords that use some of the most egregious practices to displace tenants. St Nicks Alliance is proud to organize and assist tenants living in buildings owned by some of these landlords to ensure that their homes are safe and free of harassment. To tenants in New York City that are facing harassment or other housing quality issues, our message is: You are Not Alone, you have housing rights and there are organization and City Agencies that can help you with your housing issues" said Rolando Guzman, St Nicks Alliance Deputy Director for Community Preservation and Policy

“If negligent landlords like Daniel Ohebshalom are unable to take care of their buildings, then it's time to give them over to the tenants. Our state must pass the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act and give these homes back to the community. Every New Yorker deserves a safe, stable home where we can live without fear of walls crumbling down around us,” said Cea Weaver, Housing Justice for All

The annual Worst Landlord spotlights the most negligent property owners in the city, as determined by the number of dangerous housing violations in their buildings. Private landlords on the Worst Landlord Watchlist are ranked objectively according to data obtained by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD). Landlords are ranked based on the average number of housing code violations open per month on their buildings on the watchlist, using data from December 2022 to November 2023. More on the methodology is available here.

View the full Worst Landlord Watchlist, and check to see if your address is owned by a 2023 worst landlord, by visiting LandlordWatchlist.com.