Press Room

After private sector nurses engaged in a strike earlier this year for increased pay and improved working standards, the Bronx Times has published an op-ed by New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams and Sonia Lawrence, a nurse at Lincoln Hospital and President of NYSNA’s H+H/Mayorals Executive Council. The piece, entitled 'NYC public hospital nurses need pay parity with the private sector,' discusses the ongoing fight for adequate pay, conditions, and benefits for nurses in the public hospital system and makes clear the consequences of delayed action.

"The city is hemorrhaging nurses from hospitals run by NYC Health + Hospitals and the mayoral agencies," the two leaders argue. "With low pay and chronic crisis-level understaffing, nurses are quitting in droves and either retiring early or going to the private sector where they can make a better living. To maintain quality care for our city’s most vulnerable patients, we must take action to retain trained, experienced nurses at the bedside. There is a simple solution: Our public hospital nurses need wages that are competitive with the private sector."

The piece also highlights the key role public health institutions play in caring for New Yorkers, noting that among other unique benefits "As private sector hospitals downsize and eliminate less profitable services like mental health care, labor and delivery, and emergency and trauma care, New York City’s public health care system continues to provide these essential services. And as the federal government reduces financial support for COVID-19 testing, treatment and vaccination, NYC Health+Hospitals will continue to fulfill its mission to care for all New Yorkers. They will do it at a financial loss, so we all can gain a measure of health and security. Our city’s inability to retain experienced nurses threatens those essential services."

It is clear that "Keeping nurses’ pay this low is costing the city."

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

NYC public hospital nurses need pay parity with the private sector

by Sonia Lawrence and Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams

New York City is home to the largest public health system in the country, caring for 1.4 million New Yorkers each year, regardless of ability to pay or immigration status. Our public hospitals are the safety-net that working-class and immigrant communities depend on. But our public hospitals are under incredible strain, facing an understaffing crisis worse than we’ve ever seen before.

The city is hemorrhaging nurses from hospitals run by NYC Health + Hospitals and the mayoral agencies. With low pay and chronic crisis-level understaffing, nurses are quitting in droves and either retiring early or going to the private sector where they can make a better living. To maintain quality care for our city’s most vulnerable patients, we must take action to retain trained, experienced nurses at the bedside.

There is a simple solution: Our public hospital nurses need wages that are competitive with the private sector.

Nearly 9,000 public sector nurses, members of the New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA), are bargaining a new union contract and are calling on the city to live up to its promise to implement pay equity with the private sector. The city’s contract with the nurses, which expired on March 2, has a clause committing to pay parity between the public and private sector, but that clause has been on pause for far too long.

NYSNA’s private sector nurses captured our city’s heart with a successful strike, and raised standards higher than ever before. The public sector hasn’t kept up with those standards for working conditions and pay – and we’re falling further behind. A new nursing graduate in the public sector will now make $19,000 a year less than her private-sector counterpart. That has to change.

With a NYC budget of more than $100 billion and a proposed state budget of roughly $220 billion, we can find the funds to stabilize nurse staffing. The patients that rely on our public hospitals for care deserve nothing less.

Our city’s public sector nurses are used to being asked to do more with less. They bore the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic and have done more than anyone to keep our city safe – as of October 2022, they distributed 1.75 million COVID vaccine doses. Nurses in our city’s public outpatient clinics have given more COVID treatments than any other health system, preventing hundreds of deaths and thousands of hospitalizations.

Our 11 public hospitals make up almost 20% of our citywide hospital beds, operate the largest hospital-based clinic system in the city, and provide almost half of all Level I emergency trauma care and acute in-patient mental health services in our city. City health care workers also keep first responders like police and firefighters healthy and provide direct care to New Yorkers who receive assistance from agencies like Child Services, the Department of Social Services and other programs providing homeless services and mental health crisis services.

As private sector hospitals downsize and eliminate less profitable services like mental health care, labor and delivery, and emergency and trauma care, New York City’s public health care system continues to provide these essential services. And as the federal government reduces financial support for COVID-19 testing, treatment and vaccination, NYC Health+Hospitals will continue to fulfill its mission to care for all New Yorkers. They will do it at a financial loss, so we all can gain a measure of health and security.

Our city’s inability to retain experienced nurses threatens those essential services. While NYC Health+Hospitals continues to hire new nurses, few stay for the long-run. On some units the most senior nurse, who is training and mentoring new hires, has only one year of experience because turnover is so high.

Our city’s hospitals fill staffing gaps with travel nurses paid two or three times the salaries of staff nurses. In the Bronx, Lincoln Hospital’s Level 1 Trauma Center is now largely staffed by travel and agency nurses who are not familiar with hospital policies or the patient population we serve.

Keeping nurses’ pay this low is costing the city. We’re spending too much from our city and state coffers on expensive temporary travel nurses, and on recruitment and training for new nurses that immediately leave for higher paying jobs in the private sector.

Health and pay equity should be a priority of every decision-maker in our city and state. We’re calling for pay parity as a matter of survival for our city and its public health system.

New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams today called for a city budget that invests in public safety services and infrastructure beyond simply law enforcement, and emphasized the need to strengthen accountability and oversight through the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) and other efforts. In a statement prepared and submitted to the City Council Committee on Public Safety, he urged a holistic approach to protecting and producing public safety.

“Typically, I would be asking the City Council for more funds to bolster and expand the vital services that our city’s agencies provide to millions of New Yorkers every day,” opened Public Advocate Williams. “In the case of the NYPD, however, it is more appropriate to pinpoint where portions of their budget are better served being reallocated to other agencies. The NYPD is by far the biggest and most expensive police department in the country, and serves social service functions that are not appropriate and should be reassigned to other agencies.” He opposed the proposed reduction in CCRB headcount and highlighted actions the City Council can take to strengthen accountability.

The Public Advocate further pushed for non-police responses to people experiencing homelessness and mental health crises, and called for reallocation of funding spent on a surge of law enforcement into the subway system, particularly for officer overtime.

Public Advocate Williams commended the administration’s focus on strengthening the Crisis Management System, saying that “This is what public safety should look like: an investment in communities, robust support services, and allowing those closest to the problem to lead the solution.” He further argued for expanded funding of public defender services, noting “ It is low-income New Yorkers who ultimately face the consequences of a budget that favors district attorneys’ offices, deprived of the robust legal representation that they need and deserve. The city budget must ensure a high standard of quality legal representation for low-income New Yorkers.”

Read the full statement as submitted by the Public Advocate below.

STATEMENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS

TO THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

MARCH 20, 2023

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 Hanks and the members of the Committee on Public Safety for holding this important hearing.

Typically, I would be asking the City Council for more funds to bolster and expand the vital services that our city’s agencies provide to millions of New Yorkers every day. In the case of the NYPD, however, it is more appropriate to pinpoint where portions of their budget are better served being reallocated to other agencies. The NYPD is by far the biggest and most expensive

police department in the country, and serves social service functions that are not appropriate and should be reassigned to other agencies.

One of the major problems with the NYPD is our city’s lack of effective oversight. The CCRB has the ability to investigate complaints of police misconduct and abuse, but they are understaffed, underfunded, and without the legal power to carry out their recommendations for discipline. The proposed budget reduced the CCRB’s headcount by 22 positions; as this reduction must come from vacant positions, it will result in a racial profiling unit of only 13, when the CCRB recently testified that their headcount goal is 50. Further, since the implementation of the NYPD’s disciplinary matrix, the number of cases being sent to the CCRB’s Administrative Prosecution Unit increased 40 percent between 2020 and 2021. While OMB allowed the APU to hire four more prosecutors, they still need more staff.

Although the CCRB cannot enforce their disciplinary recommendations, there are budgetary ways for the City Council to make cuts related to abusive policing by:

Removing the use of paid administrative leave for officers under investigation

Withholding pensions and halting all rehirings of officers involved in excessive force

Requiring NYPD to be liable for misconduct settlements

The NYPD should not be involved in providing assistance and services to people experiencing homelessness or mental health crises. Dispatching police to remove people perceived as being homelessness or experiencing symptoms of mental illness to a hospital is not helpful and only wastes city resources. The city instead must invest in non-police responses to people in mental health crisis; affordable, community-based mental health services; subsidized housing; and respite and drop-in centers. 

The mayor’s harmful Subway Safety Plan has exacerbated a police overtime surge. The NYPD has a history of underestimating their overtime spending: for Fiscal Year 2023, the NYPD had budgeted $454.8 million, but as of December 31, 2022, they had spent nearly $412 million, making the overtime bill for FY 2023 on track to pass $820 million. It does not make New Yorkers safer to spend millions of dollars on overtime for police officers to remove people perceived as homeless or mentally ill from public spaces, or to stand around in subway stations looking at their phones. The bloated overtime budget is much better spent reallocated to agencies and programs that actually serve and protect New Yorkers.

Mayor Adams and I may often disagree on the most impactful ways to address crime and violence in our city, but I applaud his support of alternative solutions to violence, including violence interrupters and cure violence programs. The city’s Crisis Management System (CMS) is a network that deploys teams of credible messengers who mediate conflicts on the street and connect high-risk individuals to services that can reduce the long-term risk of violence. CMS provides non-punitive, wrap-around services including school conflict mediation, employment programs, mental health services, and legal services.

We have evidence that these alternatives to policing work to reduce violence: CMS data from 2010 to 2019 shows that the program has contributed to an average 40 percent reduction in shootings across program areas, compared to a 31 percent decline in shootings in the 17 precincts in New York City with the highest rates of violence.

Brownsville, Brooklyn’s 73rd Precinct exemplifies the success and necessity of cure violence programs. In December 2020, the police withdrew from their regular posts on Mother Gaston Boulevard for five days. Instead of a police presence, a cure violence group called Brownsville In, Violence Out watched over the two blocks between Pitkin and Sutter Avenues. No valid 911 or 311 calls were made during this pilot. A second round of this experiment a few months later saw the cure violence group and their community partners finding a missing 4-year-old and intervening in a fight brewing between groups of teenage girls, all without the help of police.

This is what public safety should look like: an investment in communities, robust support services, and allowing those closest to the problem to lead the solution.

It is also vital to adequately and robustly fund our public defender services. While free legal defender services for anyone who needs them are mandated by federal and local law, these organizations are consistently underfunded. It is low-income New Yorkers who ultimately face the consequences of a budget that favors district attorneys’ offices, deprived of the robust legal representation that they need and deserve. The city budget must ensure a high standard of quality legal representation for low-income New Yorkers.

Previously, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice (MOCJ) contracted with community-based organizations and hotels to provide housing to people just released from prison. While meant to be a short-term solution, the housing that this program provided to people who otherwise would have had to turn to the shelter system was critical for many people’s successful reentry into their communities. These hotels were staffed by security, case managers, and nurses, giving people in-home access to resources they would not have in a shelter. In January of last year, Mayor Adams awarded a new $40 million no-bid contract to the organization Exodus Transitional Communities; while Exodus ultimately shut down their program, the city should allocate new funding for a request for proposals to continue operating this service.

Lastly, in 2021, my office released a report on reimagining safety in our schools, including phasing out School Safety Agents and policing infrastructure. Prior to the pandemic, there were roughly 5,000 SSAs assigned to schools; as of late last month, according to a report released by the Independent Budget Office, that number had decreased to 3,900. The IBO also reported no indication the city plans to significantly expand the safety division to pre-pandemic levels over the next four years. The presence of SSAs and police more broadly serve only as a reaction to violence or criminal behavior and do not create safety. This natural attrition of SSAs provides an opportunity for the city to invest in creating safe school environments by hiring more guidance counselors and social workers, expanding restorative justice and violence interruption programming, implementing trauma-informed and healing-centered school environments, sustaining and creating new Student Success Centers, and increasing youth employment opportunities.

Thank you.

With rents at historic highs and city staffing levels at some agencies at dramatic lows, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams called for increases in income-targeted affordable housing production and increases in the number of inspectors for the Departments of Buildings and of Housing Preservation and Development as priorities in the city budget for FY2024. At a hearing of the City Council Committee on Housing and Buildings, he highlighted the urgency of the housing and homelessness crisis in the city and several of the steps needed to address it.

"With a deteriorating housing stock and a worsening affordability crisis, preserving and building new income-targeted affordable housing in the city of New York is now more important than ever," said Public Advocate Williams in a statement. "As of February, the city’s homeless population reached a high of 77,000 people, a concerning number that coincides with the loss of thousands of rent-stabilized apartments in the city and loss of thousands of income-targeted affordable units as a whole."

The Public Advocate noted the urgent need for additional inspectors to identify and correct dangerous conditions in buildings citywide, saying "Staffing the departments in charge of these programs is key; a recent report by the Comptroller’s office found that amid high vacancy rates, HPD only met 33% of its targets, the Office of Administration ranking as one of the units of appropriation with the highest vacancy rate across city agencies."

He supported efforts to convert commercial office space into residential units, emphasizing the need for deep, income-targeted affordability in that development, "I urge the Council to pass Resolution 503, which calls for the conversion of commercial units to residential units. We have to make sure that affordability is key there, and that those neighborhoods have what they need to live comfortable lives. The creation of the Affordable Housing from Commercial Conversions (AHCC) tax benefit program would stimulate more funding for conversion projects, funding often cited as a key barrier to conversion efforts. DOB staffing should be increased to move this process forward quickly and create new housing."

As part of the effort to increase the safety and availability of housing, Public Advocate Williams also called for the legalization and regulation of converted accessory dwelling units. The Public Advocate's full statement as delivered is below.

STATEMENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS

TO THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND BUILDINGS

MARCH 15, 2023

Good afternoon,

My name is Jumaane D. Williams, and I am the Public Advocate for the City of New York. I would like to thank Chair Sanchez and the members of the Committee on Housing and Buildings for holding this hearing. My testimony will address housing issues as well building code enforcement as overseen, respectively, by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) and the Department of Buildings (DOB). 

With a deteriorating housing stock and a worsening affordability crisis, preserving and building new income-targeted affordable housing in the city of New York is now more important than ever. As of February, the city’s homeless population reached a high of 77,000 people, a concerning number that coincides with the loss of thousands of rent-stabilized apartments in the city and loss of thousands of income-targeted affordable units as a whole. 

The Mayor's current proposal allocates $36 million dollars for HPD’s Office of Development, earmarking funds for homeowner assistance programs, supportive housing and emergency rental vouchers. An additional $660,000 is allocated towards rental subsidy programs, reflecting a critical need to support rent-burdened households. Staffing the departments in charge of these programs is key; a recent report by the Comptroller’s office found that amid high vacancy rates, HPD only met 33% of its targets, the Office of Administration ranking as one of the units of appropriation with the highest vacancy rate across city agencies. 

In addition to supporting homeowners and renters, the city must invest in efforts to legalize, regulate and ensure the safety of converted accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The conversion of ADUs can help meet the need for housing stock. There are currently an estimated 400,000 people living in basement and cellar dwellings across the five boroughs. In addition to this, the city and state have explored converting empty office buildings into housing as an alternative to building on public land, which proves difficult given the shortage of publicly-owned land. I urge the Council to pass Resolution 503, which calls for the conversion of commercial units to residential units. We have to make sure that affordability is key there, and that those neighborhoods have what they need to live comfortable lives. The creation of the Affordable Housing from Commercial Conversions (AHCC) tax benefit program would stimulate more funding for conversion projects, funding often cited as a key barrier to conversion efforts. DOB staffing should be increased to move this process forward quickly and create new housing.

Furthermore, with recent legislation seeking to amend building codes, DOB must commit to enforcing code compliance. Code enforcement will not only equip our city’s buildings with the means to weather the impact of climate change, as it pertains to new green energy-efficient initiatives, but it will also ensure the lives and safety of New Yorkers as it relates to fire prevention. In this, I commend the administration for allocating additional city funds to reinspecting buildings with existing self-closing door violations. 

I will say, as the Chair has mentioned, in both of these agencies there seems to be a high rate of vacancies, and I do agree with trying to find efficiencies where possible in terms of vacancies, but not every vacancy is the same. Vacancies at DOB and HPD are very harmful, particularly if we don’t have enough people to inspect housing, for people to go into, or inspect construction sites, where we sadly have seen an uptick in deaths. I’m proud to have worked on [Local Law 196] so it does concern me to see what we can do to prevent those deaths.

I would also like to know -- what is the total revenues received from issuing After Hours Variances (AHV) for this fiscal year and the previous fiscal years before and during the pandemic? And in closing, I would like to know whether the AHV revenues end up in NYC’s general funds, or remain in the agency? 

Thank you.

Amid an ongoing crisis on Rikers Island and as the city indicates it will not meet the mandated timeline to close the facility by 2027, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams urged the Board of Correction to oppose both proposed changes to Department of Correction procedures in jails and changes to the Board's oversight and accountability role. At a public meeting today, he highlighted both the harm caused by the proposals and their ineffectiveness at meeting stated goals. Following his and others' public statements in opposition to the proposals, the Board declined to vote on the changes.

"The Board of Correction is intended to serve in a key oversight role – as Public Advocate, a position built on the need for oversight, I identify with that mission and mandate," opened Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams. "Today the Board is considering a number of troubling policy changes both the operations of the Department of Correction, which it is charged with overseeing, and to its own operations and procedures."

The Board today considered two requests from the Department of Correction related to incoming mail for incarcerated individuals. The Department is seeking to limit the source of packages, as well as a shift that would present detainees with a digital copy of any correspondence rather than the original physical document. Each of these requests was purportedly rooted in a desire to limit contraband - in opposing them, the Public Advocate noted not only that the changes would reduce the rights of incarcerated New Yorkers, but that they would not address the most pervasive sources of contraband, which comes through staff.

"If DOC is serious about reducing harm and shifting the culture on Rikers, they should focus on known points of entry and on reducing the population of overcrowded jails through producing individuals for court appearances, rather than fixating primarily on methods which do not address the bulk of incoming contraband and contribute to the dehumanization and reduction of rights of detained individuals..." the Public Advocate argued, later adding that "During the height of the pandemic, when visitors were not allowed on the island, drug seizures skyrocketed, and were blamed on incoming mail, but the data did not support that. The drugs found via mail wouldn’t account for even a third of the surge in seizures, and it was at this point that measures aside from limits of mail and packages should have been implemented. What is clear is that generally, the primary entry for drugs into facilities, nationwide, has been staff."

In addition, the Board considered proposals to reduce the number of annual public meetings and the number of members of the public able to speak at these meetings. In opposition to these changes which would limit the voices of incarcerated people, their families, and the broader city, the Public Advocate said "It can’t be further emphasized that limiting both the number of meetings and comments harms both the public and the Board. It limits the public’s trust in the Board as an oversight entity and eliminates a crucial knowledge base for the Board. The Board, and its role in overseeing operations in city jails, should be centered on the principles of access, transparency, and accountability. In both its guidelines for the Department and in its own procedures, it must exemplify those ideas."

The Public Advocate's full comments as delivered are below.

Good afternoon, and thank you for making space for me to speak today.

The Board of Correction is intended to serve in a key oversight role – as Public Advocate, a position built on the need for oversight, I identify with that mission and mandate. Today the Board is considering a number of troubling policy changes both the operations of the Department of Correction, which it is charged with overseeing, and to its own operations and procedures.

I want to acknowledge the backdrop of this hearing – a new announcement from the administration has pushed the timeline for the first borough-based facility, in Brooklyn, back to 2029. Our city has a moral and legal mandate to close Rikers by 2027, and this undercuts the timeline as well as the urgency of ending the crisis on the island. While we continue to push to expedite the closure, it is vital that we address the operations there today, and with that, I want to speak to three proposals before this Board.

First, the board is considering a variance to restrict packages as the DOC claims that changes are needed to confront the influx of fentanyl into the prison and a growing number of overdoses. However, this argument is contradicted by the fact that DOC is already empowered to open every single letter or package to people in custody for the explicit purpose of seizing any weapons, or drugs. Just last year, the Department of Investigation (DOI) stated that “the mail and visits are not significant entry points for contraband.” Furthermore, recent reports from the Department of Investigation found that officers exploit weakened security checkpoints in order to smuggle contraband. If DOC is serious about reducing harm and shifting the culture on Rikers, they should focus on known points of entry and on reducing the population of overcrowded jails through producing individuals for court appearances, rather than fixating primarily on methods which do not address the bulk of incoming contraband and contribute to the dehumanization and reduction of rights of detained individuals.

Second, DOC is seeking a variance to allow the department to open and electronically deliver mail to incarcerated people, rather than providing physical letters. This reduces the ability for loved ones to connect with those isolated by incarceration and has been shown to decrease the volume of correspondence. The proposed variance also represents a large-scale violation of the privacy and civil rights of people in DOC custody. 

Digitization is often cited for the lack of intimacy, privacy and connection. Not only is this distressing from a human standpoint, we've yet to see concrete evidence that incoming mail is solely responsible for the rash of overdoses. During the height of the pandemic, when visitors were not allowed on the island, drug seizures skyrocketed, and were blamed on incoming mail, but the data did not support that. The drugs found via mail wouldn’t account for even a third of the surge in seizures, and it was at this point that measures aside from limits of mail and packages should have been implemented. What is clear is that generally, the primary entry for drugs into facilities, nationwide, has been staff. At this juncture, I know the commissioner has begun a pilot program at one facility to scan staff. Investigators were easily able to smuggle contraband in through cargo pants and limited security protocol for staff. One of the first moves by the new administration at DOC was to reverse a rule that was put in place to limit their usage. Former corrections officers have testified about the ease of which drugs are smuggled in using cargo pants and about the complicity of leadership in this culture. Many jurisdictions have found themselves in litigation questioning the ability to safely and securely handle mail digitization including the vendor chosen by the Department of Corrections.

Lastly, the board is considering a change that strikes at my very ability to have input in these changes, or for the public to observe and weigh in on critical issues. This board seeks to reduce its mandate from 12 public meetings each year to 6, with three happening virtually, and to limit time and the number of participants for public comment. By decreasing the number of annual meetings to six meetings per year, this resolution would drastically impede the free-flowing exchange of current information from people incarcerated to this oversight body. Although the Board suggests that this Resolution is needed to “achieve enhanced results more efficiently,” any alleged efficiency gains would come at a great cost to incarcerated New Yorkers and to the general public. Frequent, open meetings give incarcerated New Yorkers and their loved ones a chance to have their voices fully heard. Also, these meetings play a critical role in educating the public and the Board itself on current issues in New York City Jails. The information relayed in these meetings, however, can only be as current as the meeting schedule allows and if this schedule is limited it would delay the transfer of critical, life saving information. 

I also oppose the Board’s new policy of limiting public comments to only elected officials and the first six people to sign up for each comment period. Both measures undermine the Board’s oversight authority and its accountability to the public. The best way for the public to voice their concerns is to testify in real time, before any vote is taken–the Board should allow all registered individuals to do so. To refer the general public to written comments is not an adequate substitute for real time verbal testimony. During a typical Board of Correction meeting, votes on proposed measures are taken in the very same meeting at which the measure is presented making written testimony less impactful, if at all.

Moreover, both of these proposed changes are indicative of a troubling larger trend. I want to say, any one of them could make some argument, but all of them combined give me some great concern. The Board of Correction seems to be moving away from a model of transparency and toward secrecy. This is troubling, as the Board’s purpose is to be an independent oversight body. Recently, the Department of Correction revoked the Board of Corrections staff access “to independently view Genetec, the Body worn Camera System, and handheld video at any time.” DOC also “forbade the recording and use of such video in [the Board’s] work”. With this resistance from the Department of Correction, the Board should be applying more pressure—not less. It can’t be further emphasized that limiting both the number of meetings and comments harms both the public and the Board. It limits the public’s trust in the Board as an oversight entity and eliminates a crucial knowledge base for the Board.

The Board, and its role in overseeing operations in city jails, should be centered on the principles of access, transparency, and accountability. In both its guidelines for the Department and in its own procedures, it must exemplify those ideas. 

I urge the Board to reject these changes and stay true to the mission and mandate of transparency and oversight and find some other ways to get at what you’re trying to get at – both providing and being subject to that transparency and oversight. Thank you.

"The administration’s blueprint for the next phase of the ongoing asylum seeker crisis contains many promising ideas, many of which my office has advocated for since this crisis began. It also demonstrates intention to meet our moral and governing responsibility, one that must be shared with the state and federal government along with the financial burden of a holistic humanitarian response. I thank the administration and all who collaborated in developing this approach.

"While the intention and ideas behind this blueprint are commendable, its success relies on its implementation, much of which is unclear. Creating a new center rather than the Port Authority Bus Terminal is positive, but this area should be clearly designated and specified, as should the additional municipalities which I am glad to hear are ready to aid in meeting this challenge. It is true that this ongoing crisis is ever-shifting, but providing as much clarity as possible in these plans is essential to getting buy-in and successfully rolling them out.  

"I appreciate the administration’s continued focus on this issue, a focus shared by local leaders across the city who have been engaged in meeting this crisis and calling for further support from its onset. Unity, collaboration, and clarity are vital in continuing to meet this challenge together and aid our newest and aspiring New Yorkers."

This morning, the Public Advocate co-authored an op-ed in The Daily News about the city's response to asylum seekers and the need to provide adequate housing and other resources, as well as aid New Yorkers who have long been stuck in the shelter system. The piece, co-authored by Comptroller Brad Lander and City Council Committee on Immigration Chair Shahana Hanif, can be read here.

"Today’s mental health announcement thankfully centers support over enforcement, as opposed to strategies put forward in the past. Each of the three prongs of this plan are important, each are valuable, and each comes with concerns about implementation.

"Overdose prevention is urgent and essential. Expanding overdose prevention centers should be at the forefront of this work in our city just as New York should be at the forefront of the harm reduction effort nationally. I’m grateful the administration is supportive of OPCs in principle, and this must be paired with clear, consistent funding streams and a push for the governor to authorize centers and allocate funding. 24 Hour access and an increase in sites would directly, demonstrably save lives, and it’s inexcusable to deny these resources.

"Clubhouses are important spaces for New Yorkers struggling with severe mental illness, and expanding them is a welcome, important part of a holistic mental health plan. That plan must also include respite centers, though, which operate through a model equipped to provide the kind of immediate, walk-in crisis care that is needed.  

"Lastly, supporting the mental health of young people, including through telehealth, is vital. At the same time, questions and concerns remain about agencies involved in identifying the need for services and the path for their provision – it is critically important that we support families, rather than police or penalize them.

"I continue to appreciate the administration’s welcome focus on mental health – one I share. Moving forward, I hope to work with them to ensure that the ideal of support is met with implementation strategies and funding levels that truly, compassionately, effectively address this crisis on all fronts."