Press Room

As asylum seekers continue to arrive in New York City at a rapid rate, Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams is elevating the experiences and urgent needs of newly arriving New Yorkers, and the responsibilities of city, state, and federal government to meet those needs. In a statement prepared for a Friday City Council hearing of the Committee on Immigration, he stressed the importance of protecting the right to shelter in an overburdened and underresourced system.

"Recently, I made a visit to a shelter in Hollis, Queens, where regrettably an asylum seeker took her own life. We found out that the shelter was not meant nor prepared to house asylum seekers and was severely understaffed, with 1 worker per 100 residents, with a maximum capacity of 500 residents..." reported Public Advocate Williams. He later argued that "Shelters would not be so under strain if the backlog and wait times for housing vouchers were expedited. Some individuals that currently reside in shelters have been living there for years. Affordable and supportive housing is one pathway to simultaneously transition them from homelessness to a permanent housing situation and open capacity at shelters."

He pointed to his recent report with the Committee to End Homelessness, which recommends expanding CityFHEPS eligibility to allow people who work and earn up to 50 percent of the city’s Area Median Income to qualify and waiving the work requirement for those not employed but on public assistance to qualify. He further pushed for passage of his Homeless Bill of Rights as a means of defining and protecting key standards for asylum seekers.

He also emphasized the importance of providing families with quality educational services, saying "According to recent Department of Homeless Services figures, of the 11,800 asylum seekers in the DHS system, approximately 8,000 are families with children. Enrolling these children in school is imperative in facilitating the transition post-migration as well as providing a safer space and environment where the children have access to hot meals...The Department of Education must ensure that their processes for placing asylum seeker children is as transparent as possible and takes into consideration the transient status of the children and their families in regards to housing and the immigration system."

Read the Public Advocate's full statement below.

STATEMENT BY PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS

TO THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION

SEPTEMBER 30, 2022

My name is Jumaane D. Williams and I am the Public Advocate for the City of New York. I would like to thank Chair Hanif and members of the Committee on Immigration for holding this hearing. 

As the child of Grenadian immigrants, the impacts of immigration have affected not only my life but the millions of immigrant families that call New York City home. Many families are here today because immigration policies enabled them to seek new opportunities for themselves and their loved ones. That being said, it is deeply disturbing to see what has been happening nationally, with anti-immigrant governors using asylum seekers as political pawns. These elected officials have bussed asylum seekers to locations they had no intention of ending up in, such as New York City, just to make a statement.

Regardless, New York City will always welcome asylum seekers and all immigrants with open arms. The City has welcomed over 10,000 asylum seekers in the past few months, but the reality for our city is that it is struggling to keep up with the growing number of asylum seekers that arrive almost every day. Our city is a right-to-shelter jurisdiction as mandated by the Callahan ruling. As a result, our city is uniquely positioned to be a welcoming beacon to everyone. For many of these asylum seekers, landing in this country was an act of necessity; no one travels through thousands of miles of dangerous terrain—and with children in hand in some cases—unless the circumstances at home were dire. Their journeys often last over a month; many had to go through jungles such as the dangerous Darien Gap and sleep on the ground. Ultimately, they all ended up in New York City. Our city must make changes in order to mitigate the struggles it is currently facing to properly meet the needs of these asylum seekers.

I acknowledge and commend all the hard work the administration is doing to support asylum seekers. That being said, there are still questions to be asked and clarification needed from various city agencies on how they are coordinating efforts. I wanted a better sense of what was happening on the ground, so I visited three different sites that asylum seekers would encounter upon their arrival: Port Authority Bus Terminal, Prevention Assistance and Temporary Housing (PATH) Intake Center, and a shelter. 

At Port Authority, I spoke with some families, including those with infants, to hear more about their experiences up until this point, and my team helped to provide and distribute backpacks to families with children. At PATH Intake Center, I was provided a walkthrough of the center and the process, from initial processing to shelter placement. I also spoke with two families who had different arrival journeys, but both went through weeks of travel across numerous countries. Recently, I made a visit to a shelter in Hollis, Queens, where regrettably an asylum seeker took her own life. We found out that the shelter was not meant nor prepared to house asylum seekers and was severely understaffed, with 1 worker per 100 residents, with a maximum capacity of 500 residents. I am deeply concerned that we may see similar stories in the weeks to come if greater transparency, accountability, and culturally responsive resources (especially linguistic and mental health resources) are not provided throughout our shelter system.

Furthermore, this additional strain on the shelter system has put an even brighter spotlight on the need to codify the rights of unhoused individuals, both in and out of shelters. Int. 0190-2022, which was heard by the City Council earlier this September, would further codify and publicize the rights of unhoused individuals to access legal, language, education, and shelter services. New York City is already a right-to-shelter city, and it only makes sense to pass Int. 0190 into law to accompany our city’s status as a right-to-shelter jurisdiction.

Shelters would not be so under strain if the backlog and wait times for housing vouchers were expedited. Some individuals that currently reside in shelters have been living there for years. Affordable and supportive housing is one pathway to simultaneously transition them from homelessness to a permanent housing situation and open capacity at shelters. My office recently released a report, the Committee to End Homelessness by the Year 2026. It goes into detail about the goals and strategies to end the homelessness crisis. One of the report’s recommendations is to expand CityFHEPS eligibility to allow people who work and earn up to 50 percent of the city’s Area Median Income to qualify and to waive the work requirement for those not employed but on public assistance to qualify. 

Additionally, one of my greatest concerns lies with asylum seekers who are children. According to recent Department of Homeless Services figures, of the 11,800 asylum seekers in the DHS system, approximately 8,000 are families with children. Enrolling these children in school is imperative in facilitating the transition post-migration as well as providing a safer space and environment where the children have access to hot meals. My main concerns have to do with bilingual education programs, overall language accessibility, and access for the parents who themselves have to navigate the educational system on behalf of their children. The Department of Education must ensure that their processes for placing asylum seeker children is as transparent as possible and takes into consideration the transient status of the children and their families in regards to housing and the immigration system.

Lastly, in order for the City to continue to improve upon itself to meet the needs of our growing asylum seeker population, we need financial support from the federal government. Many of these programs that are arising to meet this heightened need cannot be executed nor succeed if there is not enough funding. Furthermore, we must direct funding straight to mutual aid groups, community-based/faith-based organizations, and clergy who have been working on the ground and directly with asylum seekers. Many of these groups and volunteers are doing this work without any compensation and deserve to be acknowledged and compensated for their efforts. At the end of the day, advocates, the administration, and everyday New Yorkers are all working to the same goal, and that is welcoming our newest New Yorkers regardless of where they come from. We must collectively work together to coordinate a sustainable, culturally and linguistically sensitive, and compassionate response to treat all asylum seekers with dignity and respect, and I believe this can be done.

Thank you.

"The path to truly equitable education in New York City must go through more than screens. We saw earlier in the pandemic that removing screens opens up access equity, and while the new framework for high school admissions is an improvement on earlier iterations of screening policies, it represents a regression from the access afforded as recently as last year.

"Acknowledging a few more opportunities for a few more students is important. Even more important is acknowledging it is insufficient in the scope of existing inequity. It is built on an inherently flawed system, at a time when we should instead be investing in innovating and enriching all schools for all students. While the plan opens additional opportunities to some underserved students, it ultimately does a disservice to the larger communities of Black and Brown students, to lower income families and neighborhoods, and does not appear to adequately account for the needs of students with disabilities.

"Finally, the laissez-faire approach to middle school admissions will likely exacerbate longstanding issues. By not implementing citywide, system-wide standards that affirmatively advance educational justice, the opportunity for inequity will only expand in the same schools and communities where it has long persisted."

Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams, prime sponsor of the landmark legislation to ban solitary confinement in New York City, spoke in support of both his bill and protecting the safety of people on both sides of the bars at the City Council hearing of the Committee on Criminal Justice Wednesday. He also pushed back against misinformation and misconceptions about the legislation. This hearing comes as the crisis on Rikers Island continues, with sixteen incarcerated people losing their lives already this year, including two reported within the last week.

Solitary confinement is defined by the United Nations as torture, yet it is still commonly used in jails in New York City. Intro 549 from the Public Advocate would finally create a concrete, enforceable ban on solitary in city jails - not just in name but in practice - while also allowing for separation and de-escalation when necessary for safety. The bill provides due process and parameters for separation and restrictive housing without enabling the deeply damaging effects of isolation.

Public Advocate Williams said of solitary, "It is cruel. It is inhumane. It can ruin people’s lives, and too many do not survive it. Many try to mask the practice of isolation with euphemistic names like punitive segregation, but there is no difference–it is solitary confinement. Prolonged isolation that looks like, feels like and acts like solitary confinement—is solitary confinement. Physical isolation coupled with the lack of meaningful social interaction causes or exacerbates trauma, as well as other mental health issues. Solitary confinement does not only impact the individual; entire communities mourn the losses of their parents, siblings, children, and friends... No one leaves solitary confinement whole."

Under this legislation, the DOC shall not place an incarcerated individual in a cell, other than at night for sleep, for more than eight hours in any 24-hour period, or during the day for more than two hours in any 24-hour period, unless such confinement is necessary to de-escalate immediate conflict that has caused injury or poses an immediate danger to a person’s safety. The bill is co-prime sponsored by Council Member Carlina Rivera and supported by Speaker Adrienne Adams and a veto-proof majority of Council Members.

Intro 549 has been widely misunderstood and mischaracterized. As the Public Advocate noted in his statement, "To be clear, this bill ends the harmful practices of solitary confinement, but does not ban separation when it is necessary to protect incarcerated individuals and staff. If an incident of violence occurs, staff will still be able to immediately separate a person while they begin the process of assigning them to restrictive housing, if necessary. While there will be new procedures in place to ensure that we are not isolating individuals, a person who poses a specific and imminent safety risk will not be immediately returned to the general population to await their hearing. Once again, DOC can separate these individuals prior to their due process hearing, but they can no longer hold people in prolonged isolation. This bill outlines a simple procedure: separate, deescalate, and investigate."

Prior to his prepared remarks, the Public Advocate addressed the controversy around the legislation, saying “To the corrections officers, I see you. I know that there is real harm being done to you. And there's real cause for concern, which is why you are here. I have heard of officers who have had heart attacks while on the job, officers who have committed suicide, I know that female officers who have been sexually assaulted on a regular basis, and while there’s misinformation being sent around about my bill, I know that the harm is real, and I want to make sure I lift that up. I think it’s important to remember that on both sides of those bars, most of those folks look like me - primarily Black and Brown people, and they generally come from the same communities. With just a few differences of circumstances, their roles could be reversed. It’s important to point out because I know the job is tough, and I know, I don’t work there on a regular basis, and I understand that there has to be accountability. I want it always, when an officer harms someone who is incarcerated, and when someone incarcerated harms an officer."

He continued, "There has to be accountability and a way to keep people safe, but I want to be clear. That cannot be based in torture, and that is all that this bill is saying. We have to find a way where we’re producing safety for everyone who’s on that island, an island that is not safe, to be produced. But I want you to know that I see you, and I hear you, and I know that the pain is very real. I also want to make sure it’s clear that this bill will not solve the problem on Rikers Island. I want to be clear about that. It is dealing with one particular issue that is also very real, and that is the torture of people that we have to prevent. We have to make sure that we’re humanizing everyone. When we dehumanize people, bad things happen. I don’t want to dehumanize our corrections officers. I also don’t want to dehumanize people who are accused of a crime. Our society is going to be based on how much we do or don’t dehumanize people, even people who are accused of committing crimes."

The Public Advocate's comments as prepared are below.

STATEMENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS

TO THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE

SEPTEMBER 28, 2022

Good morning,

My name is Jumaane D. Williams, and I am the Public Advocate for the City of New York. I would like to thank Chair Rivera and the members of the Committee on Criminal Justice for holding this incredibly important hearing.

I want to begin by calling solitary confinement what it is: torture. It is cruel. It is inhumane. It can ruin people’s lives, and too many do not survive it. Many try to mask the practice of isolation with euphemistic names like punitive segregation, but there is no difference–it is solitary confinement. Prolonged isolation that looks like, feels like and acts like solitary confinement—is solitary confinement. Physical isolation coupled with the lack of meaningful social interaction causes or exacerbates trauma, as well as other mental health issues. Solitary confinement does not only impact the individual; entire communities mourn the losses of their parents, siblings, children, and friends. We have already lost sixteen people in the jail on Rikers Island so far this year, and I am committed to doing everything in my power to end this crisis.

People who experience isolation in jails and prisons suffer socially, mentally, emotionally, and financially, both while incarcerated and after release. No one leaves solitary confinement whole. They struggle with the lasting effects of trauma and are disproportionately more likely to die by suicide or homicide. They are also at increased risk for homelessness and substance use: a 2019 North Carolina study found that survivors of solitary confinement were 127 times more likely to die from an opioid overdose within two weeks of their release.

That is why I have introduced Intro 0549-2022, which would ban the use of solitary confinement in city jails as implemented by Department of Correction (DOC), as well as provide individuals in DOC custody due process protections following an incident and prior to being placed in restrictive housing or continued use of restraints. I want to express my gratitude to Speaker Adrienne Adams and my colleagues in the City Council for sponsoring this bill. I urge Mayor Eric Adams to reevaluate his position on solitary confinement. Ending this practice in our jails is not “silly,” as he has expressed; it is life-saving, it is urgently needed, and it is long overdue.

I acknowledge that there are situations in which separation from the general population is necessary to protect the safety of those incarcerated and staff. I have worked closely with advocates to design a bill that addresses safety concerns while ending the harmful practice of solitary confinement and allows for necessary separation. We need to take care to separate and not resort to prolonged isolation, a distinction that my bill outlines.

Under this legislation, the DOC shall not place an incarcerated individual in a cell, other than at night for sleep, for more than eight hours in any 24-hour period, or during the day for more than two hours in any 24-hour period, unless such confinement is necessary to de-escalate immediate conflict that has caused injury or poses an immediate danger to a person’s safety. In this situation, a person may not be isolated for longer than is necessary to de-escalate the conflict, not longer than four hours immediately following the conflict.

In addition, my bill provides due-process safeguards for incarcerated individuals. To place a person in the confinement permitted by this law, there must be a hearing process, and the incarcerated person and their legal team must be notified. A multidisciplinary team must meaningfully review restrictive housing placements within fifteen days.

The Correction Officers’ Benevolent Association would have you believe that this bill will endanger both incarcerated individuals and correction officers. Union officials are misinterpreting the legislation because they either do not understand it or they do not want to understand it. They have also claimed that my office never reached out to them to discuss the language in this bill, which is untrue. My staff has been engaged with union representatives for months regarding solitary confinement and other issues related to the humanitarian crisis on Rikers Island. The ideas in this bill had been discussed at length with some points of agreement. Attempts to gather grassroots advocates and other law enforcement stakeholders in one room to better understand the trauma of solitary confinement and explore a better solution together were met with disinterest. However, I believe union representatives would agree that placing someone in solitary confinement as a form of correction is ineffective and irreparably damaging to the individual detained.

To be clear, this bill ends the harmful practices of solitary confinement, but does not ban separation when it is necessary to protect incarcerated individuals and staff. If an incident of violence occurs, staff will still be able to immediately separate a person while they begin the process of assigning them to restrictive housing, if necessary. While there will be new procedures in place to ensure that we are not isolating individuals, a person who poses a specific and imminent safety risk will not be immediately returned to the general population to await their hearing. Once again, DOC can separate these individuals prior to their due process hearing, but they can no longer hold people in prolonged isolation. This bill outlines a simple procedure: separate, deescalate, and investigate. 

This bill will not be an instant solution for the increased violence, self-harm, and suicides taking place on Rikers Island. We still need to decarcerate now. We still need district attorneys to drop charges in cases where there is no evidence. We need judges to stop remanding individuals when it is not needed. We need more proactive alternatives for youth. And it would be inhumane if we did not provide people with suitable healthcare in settings that maintain an individual's dignity. This bill will succeed in triggering the transformation of the DOC into an institution that will provide adequate, humane public health resources to individuals detained while awaiting trial. It will humanize all of the actors involved and interrupt an endless chain of violence by forcing our city to rightfully invest resources in therapeutic solutions for incarcerated people. This bill will make NYC safer for everyone. That is why it currently has a veto-proof majority, including the support of Speaker Adams. The bill does not introduce new or experimental ideas, but further amplifies the current NYC Board of Corrections minimum standards and decades of academic research; it is long overdue and ready to pass today. 

I understand that corrections officers and administrators have concerns about the implementation of this bill, particularly around staffing. I agree that staffing is a problem and DOC must work harder to bring officers back to work. Our jails would have more staff on a daily basis if DOC would address the excessive use of sick leave. I would also like to note that while DOC has been vocal about being dangerously understaffed, it was still able to bring busloads of officers to this hearing. NYC actually has the highest ratio of staff to incarcerated people of any city in the country. In fact, Rikers has a higher staffing ratio than it has in decades past, even factoring in sick days and vacation days. Ending solitary is actually beneficial for officers’ physical and mental well-being: according to the Vera Institute of Justice, corrections staff often report experiencing significantly lower stress levels and increased feelings of safety after leaving solitary to work in less restrictive units, or when working in solitary units that have implemented substantial reforms. 

Like many things we once thought kept us safe, solitary confinement increases problems and violence both inside our jails and outside in the community. It is our obligation to keep New Yorkers safe on both sides of the bars, and we must continue to move away from outdated practices that just create more harm. Solitary confinement as implemented by the DOC is at odds with the ultimate goal of reform and rehabilitation, and falls under the definition of torture by the United Nations. 

As lawyer and activist Bryan Stevenson once wrote, “The true measure of our character is how we treat the poor, the disfavored, the accused, the incarcerated, and the condemned. We are all implicated when we allow other people to be mistreated.” I look forward to working with all of you in creating a more safe and just city.

Thank you.

Today, Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams spoke at the New York City Council Committees on Public Housing and Oversight and Investigations joint hearing examining the recent arsenic water crisis at Jacob Riis Houses, where he condemned the Authority’s response, as well as the longstanding patterns of mismanagement at NYCHA which have contributed to a deep mistrust among NYCHA tenants. The initial positive tests for arsenic, later retracted, came just hours after the Public Advocate unveiled his new report on NYCHA’s widespread dangerous conditions and systemic failures during a press conference and tour at Jacob Riis Houses.

“This is clearly another example of how NYCHA continues to fail their residents by creating an unsafe environment.” Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams argued in today’s hearing. “In our report, we highlight the years of water damage that has ruined many apartments and the constant heat and hot water outages during the winter months. New issues like the safety of the water supply keep cropping up while recurring issues remain unabated, and it appears that NYCHA is not doing much to resolve these problems.”

The Public Advocate also decried the failure of former NYCHA CEO and current Chair, Greg Russ, to attend the hearing, saying, “I don’t know what is more disconcerting: that NYCHA’s CEO has recently stepped down during the midst of this turmoil, or that he is still serving in the capacity of Chair, making a pretty good salary, and is not here. A Chair who resides five states away with a distance of over a thousand miles. I do think it’s disrespectful that he is not here, disrespectful to the Council, disrespectful to all of NYCHA and Jacob Riis in specific, and it’s inexplicable that he’s not here to answer questions.” Russ served as CEO during the height of the crisis before stepping down after initial arsenic results were retracted.

In the wake of the crisis, Public Advocate Williams introduced legislation in the City Council to require the New York City Housing Authority to report on any outside legal expenditures it incurs. This legislation will provide the public with a sense of the financial cost of those failures and an accounting for legal actions NYCHA is involved in which extend beyond the scope of in-house counsel. With NYCHA facing a funding crisis, it is essential to have transparency about these kinds of expenses in order to identify patterns and prevent avoidable damage or unnecessary waste.

Read the Public Advocate's statement below, the bill on legal expenditures, and the report named for Jacob Riis' work, How the Other Half Lives in Public Housing.

STATEMENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS

TO THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HOUSING AND THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

SEPTEMBER 23, 2022

My name is Jumaane D. Williams and I am the Public Advocate for the City of New York. Thank you very much Chair Avilés and Chair Brewer and members of both committees for holding this hearing and allowing me to provide a statement. 

About three weeks ago, my office and I released a report called, How the Other Half Lives in Public Housing, named after a book by Jacob Riis that was written over a hundred years ago which spotlights the inexcusable and dangerous conditions at NYCHA developments that we witnessed during our 5 Borough Tour earlier this year. We did it inside of Jacob Riis Houses. Not even twelve hours later, we learned that NYCHA discovered arsenic in the tap water at Jacob Riis Houses – even though they knew we were going to be there, and we were one of the folks that were never told of what was going on. 

According to THE CITY article, the test result that showed arsenic in the tap water was completed a week before any of the residents were notified. After being notified, many of the residents informed reporters that they do not drink from the tap water because it was either brown or smells. To this day, residents still complain about the water and let it be known that the complaints were happening well before August. However, they have not been given an explanation as to why that is. This could be as a result of aging pipes, and we all need to know what the state of NYCHA’s pipe system is through the five boroughs. It is important to note that DEP conducted tests of its water to its delivery points at Jacob Riis Houses and it came back negative for any contaminants.  

This is clearly another example of how NYCHA continues to fail their residents by creating an unsafe environment. In our report, we highlight the years of water damage that has ruined many apartments and the constant heat and hot water outages during the winter months. New issues like the safety of the water supply keep cropping up while recurring issues remain unabated, and it appears that NYCHA is not doing much to resolve these problems. 

I don’t know what is more disconcerting: that NYCHA’s CEO has recently stepped down during the midst of this turmoil, or that he is still serving in the capacity of Chair, making a pretty good salary, and is not here. A chair who resides five states away with a distance of over a thousand miles. I do think it’s disrespectful that he is not here, disrespectful to the council, disrespectful to all of NYCHA and Jacob Riis in specific, and it’s inexplicable that he’s not here to answer questions. 

NYCHA has had three chairs during my tenure in office spanning twelve years which does not help to stabilize a mismanaged agency greater in size than many cities. However, I feel strongly that NYCHA will not be able to rectify its management problems without boots on the ground. NYCHA’s employees must be made up of more New York City, in particular NYCHA, residents.

With no clear direction of what NYCHA will do next, how will they ensure that this does not happen again? NYCHA’s chronic mismanagement led to the appointment and oversight of a Federal Monitor. Our report was clear that more funding was actually needed for NYCHA, but we were also clear that the mismanagement was not necessarily attached to funding, and that mismanagement was solely the auspices of NYCHA. The Federal Monitor was not notified by NYCHA of the initial arsenic test samples. NYCHA has to have a process in place to expeditiously notify residents, the mayor, and the Federal Monitor, and other electeds, of emergency conditions irrespective of water tests that yield a positive or a false positive result.

In closing, I would like to know why a contractor who was not certified with the city to do this type of testing was hired to do the testing? That’s what we have heard, and I think that’s a question that needs to be answered. In addition to that, why did it take so long to complete the water testing and why was the first test not rushed like the later ones? Why would you wait so long to get the test completed? There was a seven-day period between when the testing company had allowed the City to release the results compared to when residents at Jacob Riis found out. It is extremely inconsiderate that NYCHA residents were the last ones to hear about this even though they are the ones directly impacted. I do have to say, NYCHA was encouraged to have meetings all throughout that process, and they refused. We need to know what is the process for informing individuals of emergency situations and whether NYCHA followed its procedures. If there is no process in place, then one has to be created and implemented immediately.  

Lastly, knowledge and information is power. NYCHA cannot render its residents powerless to determine what are the necessary steps to take for their health and the health of their family. Residents can make informed decisions, but they first need to be informed. I do have to say as well, that I know this is a systemic issue. Having been through three different people in charge, it is clear that just removing one person is not going to fix the system. It is deeply entrenched systemic problems that are happening with NYCHA. 

Thank you.

"One year after Hurricane Ida struck, families are still grieving, communities still rebuilding from the flooding that destroyed homes and took the lives of thirteen of our neighbors. It is maddening to know that one year later, if Ida were to strike our shores today, its impact would be much the same.

"The city, state, and federal government have not taken the necessary steps, with necessary urgency, to protect New Yorkers from climate catastrophes that are no longer once in a century, but regular occurrences. In addition to providing all possible aid to people still reeling from the devastation of last year, the government must take immediate steps to develop the infrastructure needed for when, not if, the next storm hits. Some of the efforts announced by the city today are promising, but must be accelerated. We must codify, not condemn, units created out of desperation in a housing crisis, and protect them from the climate crisis. And I ask the Council to pass our emergency alert and flood prevention legislation.

"We cannot wait another year, for another catastrophic event, before we summon the courage and conviction to pursue long-term solutions."

“Today, Michael Nieves became the 13th person to die in city custody this year – the 29th since the beginning of 2021. 

“This is not the first time that officers stood by passively during a suicide attempt. While some corrections staff are working intensely to improve health and safety on the island, others are actively undermining these efforts. 

“Regardless of declining staff absenteeism rates, city jails have no business operating as the City’s de facto mental health facilities. But because we fail to adequately fund mental health treatment year after year, more than a thousand people with serious mental illness are currently incarcerated. 

“Our visit to Rikers earlier this week made clear to us that, despite some improvements from the nightmare we witnessed on the island a year ago, clearly conditions for people on both sides of the bars are neither safe nor sustainable.  

“Those in charge of the wellbeing of detained people must be held accountable when the basic standards of human decency are not met. The City must renew and expedite its efforts to close the jail facilities at Rikers.  

“Urgent change is needed at the Department of Correction. But no reforms will repair the loss for Michael Nieves’ family, or twelve other families this year alone."