In first public advocate debate, Williams, Rajkumar promise a lot in a not very powerful office

Jumaane Williams and Jenifer Rajkumar are running for a New York City elected office once described in the pages of City & State as “lacking control over any aspect of the government.”

At their first debate on Thursday, the two candidates nonetheless tried to make the case that they could use the office to steer the city in a safer, more affordable direction. Each echoed many of the same ideals shared by candidates for other citywide offices at recent debates: standing up to Trump, holding the next mayor accountable, filling city vacancies, fighting for affordable housing. 

“You’re worried about Donald Trump? You’re worried about the mayor? You can count on an advocate that you know will stand up for you transparently and with courage,” Williams, the incumbent public advocate, said Thursday. 

“I'm running for public advocate to fix a city in crisis,” said Rajkumar, the Queens Assembly member who is challenging Williams. 

Rajkumar’s rhetoric there echoed that of mayoral front-runner, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has referred to the city being in crisis throughout his campaign. Williams has vocally opposed Cuomo’s candidacy, but Rajkumar hasn’t endorsed in the mayoral race and didn’t say if she had any concerns about the former governor. “My concerns are the mental health crisis, the public safety crisis, the affordability crisis,” she said. “I would work with Cuomo or I would oppose Cuomo – I would do whatever is necessary for the people of New York to get traction on these issues.”

The office of the public advocate possesses limited powers to make a dent in those areas. But what the office can do is provide its occupant a platform to draw attention to issues in the city on behalf of its residents, introduce City Council legislation – but not vote on it – and investigate complaints about agencies or services. They also sit on a few commissions and have other appointment powers.

Each public advocate, with such a loosely defined guide to how to be the people’s ombudsman, takes their own path. Williams, for example, carries on the tradition of publishing a “Worst Landlord Watchlist,” and has introduced legislation to the City Council that was later passed, including criminal justice and policing reforms that sparked a veto battle between the mayor’s office and City Hall. One of Rajkumar’s promises is to turn the office into a “legal powerhouse” to hold companies and government agencies accountable through litigation.

At Thursday’s frequently combative debate, the candidates just as often talked about those visions as they argued that the other was entirely unfit to hold the post. Rajkumar, who trailed far behind Williams in a late May poll, first pressed Williams on the allegations that broke this week of a toxic work environment in his office, stemming from former staffer’s allegation that they were drugged by members of Williams’ security detail. Williams contended that his office responded appropriately, alerting relevant agencies, starting an outside investigation and putting his chief of staff on leave.

Williams, meanwhile, alleged that Rajkumar didn’t know what the office actually does, challenging her to name its charter-specified duties – an allegation Rajkumar described as “misogynistic and condescending.” 

Williams at another point noted that cartoons created by the Rajkumar campaign that depict him as lazy have been described as engaging in racist stereotypes.

“New Yorkers have told me they love these cartoons,” Rajkumar said. “People set their alarms because they want to know when the next one is coming out”

The debate was hosted by PIX11, El Diario NYC, Schneps Media and Audacy NY.