City & State New York - All Content

Lasher is keeping Katz

Annie McDonough and Peter Sterne — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 17:59:58 -0400

Like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Democratic congressional nominee Micah Lasher isn’t ready to give up on consultant Morris Katz.

At a Four Freedoms Democratic Club meeting on Thursday night, Lasher was asked whether he’ll continue to work with Katz, the 27-year-old who’s come under fire for his work with disgraced Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner. Lasher snapped that the question was “ridiculous” and said of course he would.

Katz has come under withering scrutiny in recent weeks for working with Platner, a Marine veteran and oysterman who electrified Maine crowds with his gruff left-populist speeches but also suffered an escalating series of scandals, culminating in an accusation of sexual assault by a former partner (which he has denied) that finally forced him to drop out of the race.

Katz stood by his client through earlier scandals – including offensive Reddit posts, a Nazi tattoo and allegations that he mistreated former partners – but once Platner was accused of sexual assault, Katz reportedly tried to convince him to drop out and then helped wind down the campaign.

But any association with Platner was too much for Erica Vladimer, the founding director of advocacy group Harassment-Free New York, which previously criticized Mamdani for sticking with Katz. Vladimer was also at the Four Freedoms meeting, and she wasn’t happy with Lasher’s answer.

“What a telling and terrible message the presumptive Congressmember-elect is sending to his campaign staff and future congressional employees,” she said in a statement. “For someone who touts decades of government and political experience on the campaign trail, I’d expect him to remember just how pervasive and systemic sexual harassment and abuse are in the halls of power – not dismiss a question about protecting abusers as ‘ridiculous.’ Lasher didn't just confirm he'll keep working with Katz; he made clear that accountability for survivors isn't even worth a serious answer.”

But Lasher doubled down in a statement to City & State, defending Katz while criticizing Platner. “Graham Platner should not be anywhere near the Senate and I’m glad he won’t be,” he said. “But anyone focused on blacklisting consultants four months before the most important midterm election of my lifetime should reexamine their priorities. My outstanding team of consultants, Morris Katz included, remains intact.”

Before getting entangled with Platner’s scandals, Katz was flying high. The consultant, who works with the progressive firm Fight Agency, played a key role in Mamdani’s successful mayoral campaign and remains one of the mayor’s top advisers. He also worked closely with Mamdani-backed congressional candidates Brad Lander and Claire Valdez, both of whom won their primaries.

]]>

This week’s biggest Winners & Losers

City & State — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

It’s summer and it smells like a campfire, but sadly there are no marshmallows. It seems New York City has now been hit with four plagues: 100-degree weather, wildfire smoke coming in from Canada and burgeoning outbreaks of both Legionnaires’ disease and cyclosporiasis. What the remaining six plagues might be is anyone’s guess, but for the first time during summer intern season, the lines at Sweetgreens and Just Salads around the Big Apple are nonexistent as finance bros-to-be look to avoid explosive diarrhea. But you know what doesn’t carry cyclospora parasites? Marshmallows.

]]>

Opinion: NYC’s proposed horse-carriage ban is driven by emotion and propaganda

James Gennaro — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

As an equestrian for more than 60 years, and as someone who has spent decades serving New Yorkers both in City Hall and the City Council, I am urging my colleagues to take a step back before making a mistake the city will come to regret.

“Romanch’s Law” (Int. 943), which would ban New York City's iconic carriage horse industry, is misguided legislation driven more by ideology than reality. There is still time for common sense to prevail, and that is exactly what New Yorkers expect from us.

Horse-carriage drivers and their majestic horses have been providing tours of Central Park since the very first day the park opened in the winter of 1858. The purpose was to provide residents and visitors to New York City with a bit of a respite from the hustle and bustle of the burgeoning metropolis. Carriage rides continue to serve that purpose.

The carriage-horse ban would not simply eliminate one of Central Park's most iconic and historic attractions. It would destroy an entire industry built on small, family-owned businesses, cost hundreds of hardworking immigrant New Yorkers their livelihoods and, in the ultimate irony, cost the lives of all 160 horses in the industry.

Thanks to the comprehensive horse-carriage reform law I authored 16 years ago, all carriage horses must, upon reaching age 26, be retired to a horse farm that will provide them with top-flight stables, veterinary care, outdoor exercise, etc. Such accommodations are very difficult to find and cost more than $25,000 per year per horse, which the industry pays for. Most retired horses live about five years in retirement.

But if the industry is closed down and revenue stops, there will be no money to make arrangements to retire 160 horses, some of which are as young as 5 years old, for the rest of their lives. But Int. 943 requires the horses to be retired in the same fashion that NYC carriage horses are retired now. First Class. This is financially impossible.

And Int. 943 does not allow the industry to sell the carriage horses to other carriage industries. These horses are not saddle horses. They are large, muscular “draft” horses, bred and trained to pull a plow), but there is no market for plow horses – and because these horses have never pulled a plow in their lives, that is not even an option. Therefore, many of the horses will likely be sent to slaughter.

It’s not just the horses that will suffer. There are just 68 city-issued carriage medallions, each representing a small business that has often been passed down through generations. Together, these businesses support roughly 200 workers, including carriage drivers, stable hands, farriers, owners and other skilled professionals. The overwhelming majority of them are immigrants who chose this profession, built their lives around it and take immense pride in their work and their horses.

Nothing about this ban makes sense, particularly at a time when New Yorkers are struggling through an affordability crisis. Deliberately wiping out an entire lawful, regulated industry that supports working families is not compassionate public policy – it is economic self-sabotage.

Even more troubling is that this legislation is not responding to a demonstrated pattern of abuse. In the 167-year history of New York City's carriage horse industry, not a single carriage driver has ever been convicted of animal abuse or cruelty. That fact alone should give every City Council member pause.

In November, the City Council's Health Committee rejected a nearly identical proposal known as “Ryder's Law.” After reviewing the evidence, the committee concluded that the horses receive appropriate veterinary care, are housed in stables that consistently pass city inspections and perform work that is suitable for their strength, breeding and temperament. Those facts have not changed.

Last month, our city experienced a heartbreaking tragedy when Romanch Mahajan, a young tourist from India, was killed in a carriage accident. According to reports, the driver had briefly stopped to take a family photograph and still had the horse's reins in his hand when, for reasons that remain unknown, the horse unexpectedly bolted. Multiple investigations into the cause remain ongoing.

Every loss of life is heartbreaking, and this incident deserves a thorough investigation. But good public policy cannot be driven by emotion alone. It must also be guided by facts and perspective. This was the first known passenger fatality involving a New York City carriage ride in 167 years of operation. During just the first six months of this year, by comparison, dozens of people have been killed in crashes involving two-wheeled motorized vehicles on our streets. We do not ban an entire mode of transportation because of a single tragedy. We investigate what happened, learn from it and make targeted improvements where appropriate. The same principle should apply here.

And that’s what the city government should do regarding carriage horses. To the extent there are safety concerns, we should address them. I have introduced a bill that would enhance the safety of an industry I contend is already very safe, with tougher testing of driver applicants, regular refresher training and mandatory enforcement of safety-related rules in the park. Most importantly, the bill also mandates the installation of hitching posts at carriage stands and locations where tourists like to stop for photos. The industry has been asking for years for the installation of this critical safeguard – hitching posts are 100% effective against horses getting loose – but prior mayoral administrations and the Central Park Conservancy have failed to act.

Int. 943 fails everyone. It sentences the horses to death, ignores the wishes of the public, disregards the livelihoods of hardworking immigrant families and seeks to dismantle a safe, highly regulated industry without any compelling justification. New Yorkers deserve leadership that addresses genuine problems – not legislation that creates new ones.

]]>

The NYC Council passed a $10k bonus for paraprofessionals. Will the mayor sign it?

Chantal Mann — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 17:53:40 -0400

You get a raise! And you get a raise! At the New York City Council, everybody gets a raise!

The New York City Council passed legislation Thursday to give paraprofessionals – instructional aides who assist public school students with disabilities and have a starting salary of $32,500 – a $10,000 bonus. The legislation passed by a unanimous vote of 49-0. (Council Members Darlene Mealy and Vickie Paladino weren’t present.)

The city is legally mandated to provide paras to students with disabilities as outlined in their Individualized Education Programs, but the role has 1,600 vacancies across the city, according to the teachers’ union, as low wages dissuade potential workers from pursuing the profession. “You cannot sit idly by as a city knowing that there are thousands of children every day not receiving their services,” United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew said during a press conference at City Hall prior to the vote. “We’re trying to make sure that our school system is able to pull out of a significant crisis, one it has never faced like this before. And at the same time, to do justice for the people who have been left dealing with the crisis.”

Council Member Carmen De La Rosa, the bill’s prime sponsor, said during the press conference that the bill would save the city money by reducing the frequency of Carter cases, lawsuits in which families of students with disabilities seek reimbursement from the city for the cost of placing their children in private schools because city schools don’t meet their needs.

The UFT has advocated for the bill for more than a year, and the vast majority of council members signed on as cosponsors, but then-Speaker Adrienne Adams refused to move it, citing the legal concerns. Mayor Zohran Mamdani supported the bill on the campaign trail, but has changed his tune since taking office..

“I have been clear that questions of compensation are best resolved through the collective bargaining process that respects workers and their unions. However, the Council's passage of this legislation is in direct violation of the Taylor Law,” the mayor said in a statement following the vote, referring to the state statute mandating that all wages and benefits for public sector workers get decided through collective bargaining. “Our administration is reviewing the final language carefully and working to determine the appropriate next steps.”

Echoing the mayor’s concerns, the fiscal watchdog Citizens Budget Commission released a statement before the vote urging the council not to pass the bill and to instead address the issue through collective bargaining. The UFT, however, won’t begin contract negotiations until 2027.

“Would we have preferred to do this through collective bargaining? Of course. Would we have preferred to do this in the budget? Absolutely,” Council Speaker Julie Menin said Thursday. “But the administration did not want to do either of them. The council is going to use every tool in its toolbox to act.”

Whether or not this specific tool is allowed is a bit more complicated, given concerns about the Taylor Law. The council could potentially face a lawsuit for legislating the bonus outside the bargaining process, but lawmakers and advocates insist that the bill doesn’t violate any laws.

“Let me be clear: we are the United Federation of Teachers. We're the largest local in the entire country. We understand the Taylor Law,” Mulgrew said. “That's why this bill is written specifically the way it is.”

Before any legal challenges can happen, though, the mayor would have to sign the bill – which he hasn’t committed to. And even if the mayor vetoes the bill, it passed with more than enough votes to meet the two-thirds majority threshold needed to override a mayoral veto.

“I really hope it does not come to that,” Menin said during a pre-stated press conference Thursday. “I don't understand how (the bill) could be controversial, or how anyone could disagree with that.”

]]>

New York City Council votes to give themselves and other electeds an 18% raise

Sahalie Donaldson — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 17:06:47 -0400

New York City elected officials are set to get their first pay raise in a decade after the City Council approved legislation Thursday to hike their salaries 18.2%.

The move comes nearly a month after a three-person independent panel convened by Mayor Zohran Mamdani recommended the legislative body do so, pointing to how the cost of living has significantly increased since electeds saw their last pay increase in 2016. Council members, citywide officials, borough presidents and district attorneys will all receive the 18.2% raise likely as soon as next month. Mamdani and City Council Speaker Julie Menin, however, have both said they would refuse any salary increase themselves. (Menin said she officially informed the council’s personnel services division Wednesday that she would indeed be declining any pay increase during her term.)

The legislation, which was sponsored by City Council Member Nantasha Williams, passed Thursday with 42 members voting in its favor, and six against. That split was largely partisan, with conservative Democrats Phil Wong and Susan Zhuang joining Republicans Joann Ariola, Inna Vernikov, David Carr and Frank Morano against the pay raise. Menin was the lone member to abstain from the vote.

After the last two mayors declined to convene a pay commission in their outgoing terms despite a city charter mandate to do so, things have proceeded rapidly under this City Council. The legislative body accepted all of the commission’s recommendations as is, with the exception of a provision for salaries to be automatically raised to account for changes in the cost of living, or at most 8.25%, if a future mayor refuses to call the panel to implement a pay increase. While council members initially included this in their legislation, it was quietly removed from the final version of the bill last week after good government groups raised concerns about the proposal.

]]>

Cait Conley fears Trump’s cartel focus could create a national security blind spot

David DiMolfetta — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 15:09:05 -0400

Editor's note: This story was originally published by City & State's sister site NextGov.

Democratic congressional candidate for New York’s 17th district Cait Conley fears the Trump administration’s focus on cartels and fentanyl is coming at the expense of U.S. preparedness for threats from China and Russia — a trade-off she likened to Washington’s overinvestment in counterterrorism after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

“I think we learned this a decade ago, coming out of the counterterrorism fight,” Conley said in an interview discussing how she’d bring her national security policy and military experience to a congressional seat.

A West Point graduate and Army officer who later worked at the National Security Council and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Conley is challenging Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., in the coming general election.

Conley said the federal government spent years rebuilding its ability to compete with major state adversaries after concentrating much of its national security resources on terrorist organizations. She contends that the Trump administration’s focus on cartels and other threats in the Western Hemisphere risks reversing some of that progress.

“I don’t want illegal drugs coming into America, but I also don’t want to cede key national security interests to China and Russia,” Conley said. “And so we have to find a way to do it all. That is the government’s job in keeping America safe.”

“My concern is: what we have seen from this administration is a cozying up to [Vladimir] Putin [and] a willingness to sacrifice national security priorities in order to line pockets of billionaire buddies with China,” she added. “And — in terms of the federal government workforce — a dismantling of the entities that were there to protect this country against foreign malign influence operations, something that we see Russia [and] China use as the tip of the spear in many of their campaigns against America.”

She was referring to last year’s disbandment of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force and the Office of Director of National Intelligence’s drawdown of its Foreign Malign Influence Center. CISA also froze much of its election security work and ended funding for programs supporting state and local election officials.

On Thursday night, President Donald Trump is widely expected to unveil previously classified findings that allies claim would prove the 2020 election was stolen from him, specifically regarding Chinese attempts to meddle in the election. In 2021, the U.S. intelligence community collectively assessed that Beijing “did not interfere with election infrastructure, including vote tabulation or the transmission of election results.” The IC also said that China “did not deploy interference efforts and considered, but did not deploy influence efforts intended to change the outcome” of the election.

Conley expressed concern that political pressure is shaping national security and intelligence assessments. Last year, then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard fired two top National Intelligence Council officials weeks after the group authored an assessment that contradicted Trump’s claims about Venezuelan gang members.

“I do worry about the integrity of the products that are being pushed out,” she said, “not because I worry about the integrity of the public servants doing it, but because we’re seeing a growing political influence on what those things are.”

She pointed to the conflict with Iran and the disruption of commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz as an example of a risk that national security planners had anticipated well before the current fighting.

“Any professional in this space who’s looked at Iran, or has been part of these war games or policy discussions … would tell you that this potential outcome was always known,” she said.

Conley said the danger that Iran could disrupt the strait, withstand an extended air campaign and inflict significant casualties had informed U.S. policy discussions for years. She acknowledged that she had no direct knowledge of the administration’s internal deliberations but questioned whether those risks were fully presented to Trump or disregarded.

Tensions in the strait have impacted gas prices across the country, including in New York.

“I don’t know if they failed to tell him the hard truths, or if this administration just didn’t want to hear it,” she said.

Lawler has voted against multiple House war powers resolutions that sought to limit the administration’s ability to continue hostilities without congressional authorization. He has argued that such measures could constrain the U.S. while American forces remain under threat.

Conley’s policy interests extend beyond congressional committees associated with homeland security, intelligence and foreign affairs. If elected, she said she would seek a seat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

“I would like to eventually end up on Energy and Commerce,” she said. The panel has jurisdiction over energy, telecommunications, technology and large portions of the nation’s critical infrastructure. Conley said that portfolio increasingly overlaps with national security as cyberattacks, supply-chain vulnerabilities and foreign-made technology create risks beyond the traditional defense establishment.

“National security in the 21st century is so different than the 20th,” she said.

Conley pointed to the country’s reliance on Chinese-made equipment at U.S. ports as one example. Federal officials have spent years examining cybersecurity risks associated with foreign-made cranes and other port systems.

“I don’t believe we need to pay extra to manufacture a basic drinking glass in America,” Conley said, “but I think if it’s necessary to manufacture our critical infrastructure, we should.”

A position on Energy and Commerce would also give Conley a role in debates over artificial intelligence and large data centers, including their effects on electricity rates, water supplies and local infrastructure. It would relatedly help her focus on legislation geared toward utility costs, an area that she says has been a major issue for constituents.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul recently ordered a temporary pause on certain state environmental permits for new large data centers while her administration develops a regulatory framework.

Conley said policymakers need to assess those facilities’ effects before residents are left to absorb higher utility and infrastructure costs. She framed the issue as an opportunity for Democrats to become “the party of responsible technology” — supporting innovation while establishing standards intended to protect communities.

“Communities are bearing the costs of these decisions without guardrails,” Conley said, “and we’ve got to stop it.”

Her concerns about political influence extend beyond the quality of individual intelligence assessments. Asked how she understands Trump’s tendency to rely on his own instincts in national security matters, Conley’s answer centered less on his psychology than on the officials and institutions around him.

“I also hold a Republican-controlled Congress accountable too for not checking him,” she said, arguing that the GOP “should have reined him in and forced better judgment in execution and decision-making.”

That dynamic, in her view, reflects a broader incentive problem in Washington: elected officials focused on retaining power and senior administration officials unwilling to deliver unwelcome advice. Conley said her work at the White House and CISA gave her a close look at “the people that were there for the right reasons, and the people that were there for the power.”

She tied that argument to her support for congressional term limits and a ban on members of Congress participating in stock trading. Conley has not settled on a specific term-limit structure but said congressional service should not become a lifelong career.

She argues that addressing Trump’s approach requires more than just installing different experts or producing better intelligence; it demands electing officials willing to act, regardless of the political cost.

“At West Point, there’s a cadet prayer, and one of the lines is having the strength to choose the harder right over the easier wrong,” Conley said. “I believe that same ethos is something that members of Congress should always aspire to.”

]]>

Blakeman fundraising numbers much lower than he initially touted

Rebecca C. Lewis — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 22:34:20 -0400

Earlier this week, a top campaign official for Republican Bruce Blakeman’s gubernatorial campaign told the New York Post the Nassau County executive had raised nearly $11 million in his bid to unseat Gov. Kathy Hochul, enough to compete with the incumbent’s deep coffers. But a new campaign finance filing shows Blakeman hasn’t raised anywhere near that amount.

Blakeman’s July periodic report filed Wednesday evening revealed he had only raised about $3 million since his last filing in March. He also had roughly $1 million transferred in from the Nassau and Suffolk County Republican Parties over the last four months, and received some $770,000 in the first round of public matching funds distributed in the race.

Before this filing, Blakeman had only raised roughly $1.1 million in direct contributions since launching his campaign in December. Combined with the $3 million from the July filing, that brings Blakeman’s total donations to $4.1 million – nowhere near the total $11 million his campaign finance chair, Howard Fensterman, gave the Post.

Even when accounting for transfers in from his county executive account and local Republican Parties, as well as public matching funds, per state campaign finance records, Blakeman has only brought in about $8 million total for his bid against Hochul – still well short of the touted $11 million raised. That means a little under half of Blakeman’s campaign war chest came from sources other than direct donor contributions.

Blakeman’s campaign has also qualified for an additional $1.2 million in matching funds, but the campaign did not report receiving the money yet. The campaign suggested to the Post that the campaign will also qualify for an additional $1.5 million on top of the $11 million claim.

As of July 11, Blakeman’s campaign had $4.6 million cash on hand.

Reached by phone, Fensterman did not comment on the discrepancies and instead deferred to the campaign’s finance staff. A spokesperson for Blakeman reiterated the $11 million claim. After this story was published, the spokesperson added that the campaign intended to file an amended report and pointed out the additional matching funds not reflected in the initial filing.

Hochul’s campaign had not yet filed its July periodic report as of Wednesday night, but her campaign announced she had raised $5.6 million in the first six months of the year. According to her campaign, the governor ended the period with over $20 million on hand.

]]>

Mamdani raises $304,000 in first reelection filing

Jeff Coltin, Annie McDonough, and Sahalie Donaldson — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 19:40:19 -0400

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has already raised roughly $304,000 from nearly 6,000 donors in his bid for reelection in 2029.

All but one donation came within just the last month, though the fundraising report filed with the New York City Campaign Finance Board Wednesday night covers the first six months of Mamdani’s time in office, a period when his political profile has reached new heights. In fact, 61% of the haul came from donors giving addresses outside the five boroughs – with some of the max-out donors hailing from California, Texas and Virginia.

Mamdani excelled at fundraising in the Democratic primary last year, becoming the first candidate in the crowded race to raise up to the maximum spending limit well ahead of the rest. Then and now, Mamdani focused on grassroots fundraising – donors over the last month gave an average of just $52. But the urgency around that 2025 campaign is lacking with Mamdani now in power, and seemingly less in need of a massive fundraising push three years before the next primary. In the first three months of his mayoral campaign in late 2024 and early 2025, Mamdani, then a longshot candidate, brought in a whopping $643,000.

Mamdani has not yet formally opted into the public matching funds program. Campaign Manager Celia Castellan told City & State he doesn’t plan to participate, but declined to comment on the decision to opt out of the popular program that helped propel Mamdani to victory in 2025.

Asked about the decision – and whether he would also reject super PAC support – at a press conference on Thursday, Mamdani suggested that the limits of the matching funds program would hamper his ability to combat what’s spent against him in 2029. “The matching funds program was critical in my race to becoming the mayor of our city,” he said in response to a question from the Daily News. “What we also saw in that same race was the amount of money that was spent in opposition to our campaign far dwarf what we were able to raise and spend through the program. And so this is a decision we've made to look to narrow the gap between the resources that we would be able to raise and spend, and those that we know will be marshaled in opposition." He did not answer whether he would reject the support of super PACs.

His filing includes 33 donations that exceed the individual contribution limit for participants in the public matching program, which is $2,500. Those larger contributions include 29 donations of $4,350 each, including 16 from donors outside the city. Those giving to the max-out level include numerous out-of-state donors who don’t list their jobs, as well as Mehak Jamil, an attorney at the state Department of Financial Services, Google software engineer Michael Matloob and Dermot Madden, a carpenters union supervisor at the city Department of Transportation.

“6,000 donors. One shared goal. With an average donation of just $45, everyday supporters are fueling the Mayor's re-election campaign – proof that this is bigger than politics as usual,” Castellan said in a statement. “It's a movement.”

Mamdani started fundraising early for his 2029 reelection campaign, sending out text messages to supporters soliciting donations just last month. No serious Democratic challengers have filed to run against him. The only people who’ve claimed they would do so at this point are far to the democratic socialist mayor’s right: John Chell, the controversial former New York City Police Department chief of department, former Republican mayoral nominee Curtis Sliwa and randomly, Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy and actor Michael Rapaport. Not exactly big threats. None of them have registered campaign committees with the Campaign Finance Board yet.

Still, rumblings of discontent amongst the city’s business community and the formation of a group called NYC Common Sense launched this spring to fight Mamdani’s democratic socialist agenda could lead to stronger challengers emerging down the line. The growth of Mamdani’s war chest over the first six months of his tenure indicates he’s taking things seriously – and simultaneously, that any efforts to take him down won’t be easy.

Mamdani ended up with just over $100,000 on hand, after spending more than $204,000 in this first period. The spending was mostly on campaign personnel and consultants. Mamdani has hired Middle Seat, the progressive consulting firm that has earned acclaim for working with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and congressional primary winner Darializa Avila Chevalier. He’s also brought back his star-making video firm, Melted Solids, and Andrew Bard Epstein, one of Mamdani’s first hires on the 2025 campaign who served as his communications director.

It’s not unusual for a mayor to start fundraising so early in their tenure. In the same filing period for the 2025 election cycle, former Mayor Eric Adams reported raising a staggering $850,000 between January and July of 2022. Before him, former Mayor Bill de Blasio reported raising roughly $44,000 for reelection in the first six months of his tenure.

City Comptroller Mark Levine also reported receiving $117,110 over the latest filing period – a sizable launching pad years before he’ll need to kick into re-election gear. That was buoyed by several big donations from business leaders and real estate donors, including a $2,500 donation from Warby Parker CEO Neil Blumenthal, another $2,500 donation from real estate executive Brian Cooper, a $1,000 donation from Tri-Star Construction Corporation President Jack Irushalmi and $2,500 from private investment firm leader Thomas Kempner.

Campaign finance reports were also due for campaigns from the 2025 cycle, as candidates await a mandatory audit from the campaign finance board. Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s campaign reported it’s $182,318 in the red, factoring in nearly $214,000 in unpaid liabilities to vendors including Fat Camp Films and Next Public Affairs. Cuomo didn’t report bringing in any new donations between January and June, but refunded $300 to clothing manufacturer Jordan Friedman of Brooklyn. Republican mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa also reported being a little over $300,000 in the red.

Adams, meanwhile, reported still having just over $2.1 million cash on hand. That could potentially be sent to a state account, which could be used to pay Adams’ legal fees, but the former mayor hasn’t reported making any transfers yet. Adams also belatedly reported more than $434,000 in expenses made in 2025 during his failed, abandoned reelection campaign. More than $225,000 in payments were finally recorded to Adams Campaign Manager Eugene Noh and his firm Legion Consulting, months after Politico noted their absence in his filings. Adams’ campaign had also faced scrutiny from NBC New York for payments it did report to seemingly anonymous LLCs – one of which turned out to be a shockingly large, half-million dollar payment to TV personality Dr. Phil’s son, for digital strategy.

]]>

Aging leaders celebrate new funding amid demographic boom

Chantal Mann — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 17:51:30 -0400

New York and the people who call it home are constantly changing, including the state’s fastest-growing demographic: adults over 60.

New York City Department for the Aging Commissioner Lisa Scott-McKenzie and New York State Office for the Aging Director Greg Olsen addressed City & State’s New York Aging Summit on Wednesday, touting increased budget allocations that will allow New Yorkers to “age with dignity.” There are now more than 5 million New Yorkers over the age of 60. So beyond economic investments, the government leaders are also challenging the way we think about aging.

“I remember with my kids when they were little, we watched ‘SpongeBob SquarePants,’” Olsen said in his keynote remarks. “Did you ever see the way they portray the old fish? It’s funny, but it’s not, because it starts there,” Olsen said in his keynote remarks. “And language is important. ‘Silver tsunami.’ I absolutely hate that. What good has ever come from a tsunami? Death and destruction. So language matters.”

Money matters, too. The state Office for the Aging received $436 million dollars in the state budget for fiscal year 2027, a slight, $1.9 million increase from the year before. That includes an $8 million initiative to expand the state’s naturally occurring retirement community program, plus funding for community-based service organizations and resources to combat elder abuse and scams.

On the city side of things, DFTA received a $30 million increase to its baseline funding this year, raising its budget to $635 million for fiscal year 2027. During her keynote remarks, Scott-McKenzie emphasized the importance of using those funds to support home modifications to address increased fall-related mortality, financial exploitation prevention and access to healthy and flavorful meals.

“We like pasta, but we’re tired of pasta,” Scott-McKenzie said. However, “some of our older adults are not as enchanted with the plant-based meals … Food is medicine, so we want to be sure that if we are replacing some of these meals, that what we are offering is just as healthy. But what difference does it make if it’s healthy, and no one wants to eat it?”

Despite these wins, DFTA and the SOFA budgets both make up less than 1% of the city and state’s FY 2027 budgets – even though 60-and-older New Yorkers make up nearly 25% of the state’s population. Lawmakers and advocates have argued that the percentage should be higher, with state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli and New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin both advocating for funding increases.

Or, as state Sen.Cordell Cleare put it: “It’s about the money. Show us the money,” she said during a panel discussion at the summit. “You want people to take care of people? Then you gotta pay them.”

]]>

Horse carriage ban sponsor Chris Marte is having a moment

Sahalie Donaldson — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:09:32 -0400

Tears, jeers and cheers punctuated the New York City Council’s long-awaited hearing Wednesday on legislation sponsored by Council Member Chris Marte that would ban the city’s horse-drawn carriage industry.

It was a long, emotionally charged day. Family members of Romanch Mahajan, the 18-year-old tourist who died last month falling out of a horse carriage in Central Park, opened the hearing by imploring council members to pass the bill renamed in his honor. That was followed by a slew of testimony from animal welfare groups and elected officials including Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal and state Sen. Erik Bottcher who advocated for the ban, and union representatives and carriage drivers advocating against it. After nearly than five hours of testimony, the hearing showed no signs of coming to an end, as dozens more waited to testify.

Efforts to ban horse-drawn carriages have stagnated for years due to fierce opposition by Transport Workers Union Local 100, which represents the industry. But tides appear to be changing. The legislation is approaching majority support in the City Council. Mayor Zohran Mamdani is broadly supportive of banning horse carriages, albeit with amendments to beef up worker protections for carriage drivers. And just one day before the hearing, City Council Speaker Julie Menin officially declared her support. All bode well for supporters.

It also bodes well for Marte, who is at the forefront of not only the horse carriage ban bill, but another bill picking up steam recently. He also sponsors legislation that would ban grueling 24-hour shifts for home health aide workers – another longstanding fight that’s getting new life.

City & State spoke with Marte on Tuesday about why the tide is shifting on horse carriages, whether he thinks Menin should be protested for not advancing his home health aide reforms and how recent primary wins shake up Manhattan politics.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Momentum to ban horse-drawn carriages in New York City has built significantly in recent weeks, especially in wake of the death of Romanch Mahajan. Your legislation is nearing a majority of support, with members representing a broad ideological spectrum. That’s a sharp juxtaposition to last year when the bill died in committee. Why do things feel different now?

I think a few things. Before I took on the bill to become the prime sponsor, I wanted to make sure that there was mention of a workforce development program because historically, issues have been pitted against other issues – whether it’s animal welfare and whether to protect and help the workers transition into another job. We wanted to make sure that it had both of those things when we introduced it while also making sure that horses can go to sanctuaries as well. I think that is a big difference. But also, unfortunately, the death of Romanch, the Indian tourist who was here with his family, really set the tone that we have to act now, and we can no longer wait for something else to happen.

Mamdani said that while he supports “the spirit of the bill,” he has some concerns about the “inefficiencies of the worker protections” in terms of horse carriage drivers who’d be forced to leave the industry. Some of the potential options he mentioned were things like beefing up development and training programs. Are you receptive to either of these things?

Absolutely. I don’t want anyone to lose the opportunity of getting another job. Whatever the Mamdani administration agencies are proposing, I will definitely listen to. However, I don’t want the timeline to change. Right now there’s a two-year timeline to transition workers into other jobs. If the proposal we’re receiving extends that timeline, I think it will be too much. But look, we want to have a dialogue. We have been talking to the administration leading up to the hearing, and we want to work with them to make sure that this can be a success for both sides of City Hall.

The Transport Workers Union of America tweeted at you describing you as “an absolutely unserious person pushing a ban on carriage horse rides in Central Park.” This was attached to a clip from a hearing last year where you spoke about how if a human or another animal like a cat or a dog was forced to pull a horse carriage, we would call it inhumane. What’s your reaction to that criticism?

I stand by that statement. Why is it only horses where they think it’s okay for them to push a carriage that’s thousands of pounds with passengers on it throughout the year? Whether it’s hot or cold, I think it’s unacceptable. I’m glad that they're promoting that rhetoric because I think it helps.

What is the latest on your legislation to ban 24-hour shifts for home health aides? That also looked like it was gaining ground earlier this year, buoyed by support from Speaker Julie Menin, but things appear to be at a standstill now. Menin ended up pulling the legislation from consideration and Council Member Shahana Hanif, who chairs the council’s Committee on Disabilities, stepped down as a sponsor. It seemed like a deal to bring it forward was struck in late April, but that’s clearly yet to happen.

The conversations are still ongoing. I check in with the speaker's team fairly regularly on this bill, and we’re going to pass it. We’re just working with the speaker and other stakeholders to get it to a place where workers feel like we’re actually going to end the 24-hour workday.

I do think there’s been a lot of momentum recently with the United Nations’ letter which called these 24-hour shifts pretty much a crime against humanity, modern-day slavery, and discrimination against women. There’s been additional news that the home attendants who decided not to go with the union arbitration in part of their lawsuit over wage theft actually just won their case in the highest courts in New York.

We know this is wage theft, we know this is inhumane and now the court has backed our movement, saying that these workers should be paid the hours that they’ve been working. So while we’re still negotiating in the City Council, there’s a lot of momentum happening outside that’s definitely going to help push this bill over the finish line.

Home care workers brought the fight directly to Menin’s door, kicking off a sit-in outside of her apartment Tuesday in an effort to push her to bring the legislation forward for a vote. Do you think she deserves to be protested?

You know, we’ve been talking a lot with the speaker's office. I wish we could have passed this bill a long time ago, but we continue to work with them, and we welcome the opportunity to move forward with this piece of legislation.

Are you hopeful that will happen before the end of the year?

Yes.

More broadly, it seems like it’s been a pretty good year for you. You’re chair of the Subcommittee on Landmarks, Public Sitings, Resiliency, and Dispositions, you’re at the helm of these two big bills that are major conversation starters and actually looks like they may pass after years of that not being the case. You’ve talked about how you feel like your bills have been overlooked in the past. What do you think has changed and how do you intend to leverage this moment?

I think it’s never giving up on an issue and having political coverage. Both of these pieces of legislation have been through a number of administrations – especially the horse carriage bill – and you know we didn’t want to give up on this fight. When (former Council Member) Bob Holden, the prior sponsor, was term limited, we wanted to make sure that we were going to actively fight for this and make sure it was top of mind.

Sometimes things come easily, in a few weeks or months, but I think my office, we’re committed to the harder fight. We’re also looking to potentially reintroduce the retiree (healthcare) bill this August or September.

There’s a new cohort of people who’ve won Democratic primaries set to soon shake up downtown politics. What changes are you expecting?

I want to first congratulate Brad Lander and Illapa Sairitupac on their victories. I’ve worked with both of them. When he was comptroller, Brad Lander was an ally in the retiree fight. He showed up to many of my home attendant rallies and actually released a list of some of the worst employers – home care agencies were at the top of those lists. I’m excited to continue to work with him in this new position. I think we’re going to have a lot of alignment.

I also look forward to working with Illapa. I’ve known him for a few years now, he worked on my 2021 campaign and I look forward to meeting the affordability crisis and being a local partner with him.

Have you met with Illapa since his primary victory?

We’ve traded a few text messages, but I look forward to meeting with him when things calm down.

What about Darializa Avila Chevalier? You endorsed Rep. Adriano Espaillat in the Democratic primary. What relationship do you have with her or do you expect to have with her?

I also look forward to working with her. I focus a lot on bringing reforms to the Manhattan Democratic Party – I’m sure she’s going to be an ally in making sure that we bring reforms to that organization. And you know, even though our geographic boundaries don’t overlap, I think a lot of the issues that we care about do. For example, public housing. She’s been a huge advocate for Section 9 and I’ve organized for years to fight against privatization. I think having a partner on the federal level and also locally with future congressman Lander, I think it’s going to be great to have two future Manhattan congress members that have that viewpoint.

]]>

Episode 2: The Data Question: Privacy, Disclosure & Who Sets the Rules

City & State — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 14:45:00 -0400

Sponsored by Civic Hall, TD Bank, Brown & Weinraub, Amazon

In Episode 2 of Tech in the Cities: When Every Company Is a Tech Company, Tom Allon, Founder and Publisher of City & State, and Julie Samuels, Founder, President, and CEO of Tech:NYC, explore how data is reshaping the relationship between technology and government.

Joined by New York City Councilmember Gale Brewer and Nate Loewentheil, Founder and Managing Partner of Commonweal Ventures, Tom and Julie discuss the legacy of New York City's open data movement, how AI could transform government services, and the role of transparency, privacy, and policy in the age of AI. Together, they examine what it will take for government to better harness technology while maintaining public trust.

]]>

Siffert, Martinez win tight Assembly races after recounts

Jeff Coltin and Peter Sterne — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 14:35:52 -0400

David Siffert and Patrick Martinez each declared victory Wednesday in extremely tight Democratic Assembly primaries decided after recounts.

Siffert, a lawyer and progressive activist, defeated Manhattan Community Board 2 Chair Jeannine Kiely in the race to replace retiring Assembly Member Deborah Glick in lower Manhattan’s Assembly District 66, which includes Greenwich Village and Tribeca. Siffert won by just 15 votes out of more than 17,000 cast in the June 23 primary.

Siffert should cruise to victory in November in the deep blue district to become New York’s first out nonbinary state legislator.

Glick, who was the first out gay state legislator when she first took office in 1991, endorsed Kiely as her successor. Kiely also had the backing of other prominent Democratic leaders including Rep. Jerry Nadler, Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal and the United Federation of Teachers.

Another contender, pro-housing advocate Ryder Kessler, finished third in the six-way race and also earned major endorsements from the Working Families Party, City Comptroller Mark Levine and major unions including the Hotel and Gaming Trades Council.

Siffert, meanwhile, had fewer local endorsements, but was backed by the Village Independent Democrats, the Jim Owles Liberal Democratic Club and two Democratic Socialist legislators, state Sen. Jabari Brisport and Assembly Member Emily Gallagher. A former tax attorney, Siffert was an early leader on the Invest in Our New York campaign pushing to raise taxes on the rich.

“This community has been my home for 20 years, and it’s my favorite place in the world,” Siffert said in a statement. “The best part of this campaign has been getting to know so many of my community members, and I’m consistently blown away by their passion, engagement, kindness, and values.”

While the progressive left won in Manhattan, the Queens Democratic establishment saw their pick win in the western Queens race to replace Assembly Member Steven Raga, who gave up his seat to make an ultimately unsuccessful bid for state Senate.

Martinez, a local district leader and member of Queens Community Board 2, defeated former New York City Police Department detective Shamsul Haque in a district including Woodside, Maspeth and Elmhurst. Martinez has worked in online advertising, but he descends from Queens Democratic royalty as the nephew of former Queens County Party boss Joe Crowley and son of former New York City Council Chief of Staff Ramon Martinez.

“Today, after a full and fair count of every ballot, I'm humbled and honored to have been elected to be the Democratic nominee for the 30th Assembly District,” he said in a statement. Martinez is also expected to win the general election.

Martinez ultimately won the race by just seven votes out of more than 6,000 ballots cast after a sometimes tense recount. “Martinez has won the election, and the margin of victory does not merit any further litigation,” Haque’s election attorney Ali Najmi said in a text message.

Haque is an ally of Mayor Zohran Mamdani and ran a progressive campaign focused on supporting Mamdani’s priorities in Albany. While Haque earned the endorsement of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, the mayor declined to do the same, which would almost certainly have made the difference in such a close race.

]]>

Opinion: It's time to end horse-drawn carriages in New York City

Harvey Epstein and Christopher Marte — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

For years, animal welfare advocates, public safety experts and elected officials have warned that New York City's horse-drawn carriage industry was a tragedy waiting to happen. Last month, that warning became a heartbreaking reality.

On June 17, 18-year-old Romanch Mahajan was killed after a carriage horse bolted through Central Park, crashed into traffic at the 59th Street intersection and struck multiple vehicles. What should have been a family vacation celebrating his graduation ended in unimaginable loss. Our hearts remain with Romanch's loved ones, whose lives have been forever changed by a preventable tragedy.

His death was not an isolated accident. It was the foreseeable consequence of forcing animals with powerful flight instincts to pull carriages through one of the busiest, loudest and most congested cities in the world.

This latest tragedy follows years of dangerous incidents that have repeatedly put New Yorkers, tourists, carriage passengers, drivers and horses at risk. In the last year alone, eight carriage horse emergencies unfolded in Central Park as horses spooked, broke loose and crashed, causing injuries and widespread panic.

Over Labor Day weekend last year, chaos erupted when a frightened horse threw its driver to the ground and sped through the park with two tourists trapped inside the carriage. The horse slammed into a metal pole, forcing the passengers to jump from the moving carriage to save themselves. One was injured. They later said they feared they were going to die. The horse then barreled onto a crowded lawn where families scrambled for safety, including a pregnant woman celebrating her baby shower who narrowly avoided being struck. The terrifying footage spread across the country, underscoring how easily that incident, too, could have ended in tragedy.

Now it has.

The cruelty extends beyond these public crashes. Too many horses have collapsed and died on our streets, their suffering unfolding in full view of New Yorkers and visitors alike. Others endure lives confined to cramped stables without the open pasture, grazing, movement and social companionship that horses need to thrive.

This suffering is entirely preventable.

Romanch’s Law, formerly Ryder’s Law, would responsibly phase out horse-drawn carriages, relocate horses to accredited sanctuaries and rescue homes where they can finally live as horses should and provide a just transition for workers. Council members have already been in conversations with the administration about how to connect carriage drivers, who are not unionized, with good union jobs that offer stable pay, benefits and real workplace protections. We have also been in communication with several horse sanctuaries that are prepared to take in the horses and generously compensate owners for them. This is not about leaving workers behind or creating uncertainty for the horses. It is about ending a dangerous industry in a responsible way that protects the public, supports workers and gives the horses a safe and dignified future.

We should not have needed another tragedy to prove the point.

Romanch Mahajan should still be alive. His death is a devastating reminder that this issue has never been solely about animal welfare. It is also about public safety. Every day this industry continues, New Yorkers, tourists, workers and horses remain at risk.

New Yorkers are ready to turn the page. Recent polling shows that an overwhelming majority of residents support ending horse-drawn carriages. Cities across the United States – including Chicago, Philadelphia, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Key West and San Antonio – have already done so, as have major cities around the world like Toronto, Montreal, Paris, Barcelona, Brussels, Shanghai and Mumbai.

Momentum is now building inside City Hall as well. Speaker Julie Menin just announced her support for Romanch’s Law, the bill continues to gain additional cosponsors and the City Council will hold a hearing later today on how to move forward. After decades of delay, the council now has the chance and the responsibility to act.

The question is no longer whether tragedy could strike again. It already has. The City Council must pass Romanch’s Law before another family pays the price.

]]>

DSA debates how to debate AOC presidential endorsement

Peter Sterne — Tue, 14 Jul 2026 19:26:23 -0400

Next year, the Democratic Socialists of America will debate whether to endorse a candidate – most likely Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – for president in 2028. This year, the socialist group is debating how that debate will take place – and it’s getting heated.

On Sunday, the National Political Committee, DSA’s 27-member national leadership body, discussed a proposed timeline for next year’s endorsement process and passed a controversial amendment to the proposal, which stripped out a provision that would have instructed the NPC to send out a nonbinding online poll to all members asking which candidate they supported endorsing for president. They did not pass the proposal itself, instead referring it back to another committee for revisions.

But the decision to eliminate the all-member poll was seen by many members of the organization as an unforgivable attempt to undermine the organization’s democracy – leading some to float the (very remote) possibility of severing DSA’s New York City chapter from the national organization.

“DSA’s national leadership (the NPC) just voted to overturn our convention & took away rank and file members’ right to vote in an all-member poll on presidential endorsement,” NYC-DSA Co-chair Gustavo Gordillo tweeted following the NPC meeting. “The NPC (is) taking away our members’ right to vote while NYC-DSA members send them ~ $2M per year in dues.”

In the heat of the moment, NYC-DSA’s treasurer went even further, writing in an email addressed to the NPC, “You need us more than we need you,” along with a spreadsheet projecting the financial implications of a hypothetical split between NYC-DSA and national DSA. The spreadsheet estimated that in the event of a split, only 2,000 to 6,000 of NYC-DSA’s 15,000-plus members would remain with national DSA, while the rest would follow NYC-DSA out the door. The NYC-DSA treasurer is said to have later apologized to the NPC for the email, and hundreds of DSA members have signed an open letter calling for the organization to project unity and resist any efforts to split. DSA leaders on all sides of the debate have reiterated that a split would be disastrous for the socialist movement and is very unlikely to occur.

How could a debate over how to conduct a future endorsement process for a hypothetical presidential candidate lead to such controversy? It’s partly because the procedural debate is really about DSA members’ complex feelings toward AOC. The congressional representative and socialist standard bearer remains a deeply divisive figure within the organization; most members, particularly in New York City, love her and want to see her become president, but others fear she is insufficiently committed to the organization’s politics and prone to making political compromises they see as unacceptable, particularly when it comes to foreign policy.

Another reason why the debate has become so sensationalized is because it’s very difficult to follow. After all, the NPC wasn’t actually voting on whether to endorse AOC for president. It was technically voting on whether to accept an amendment to an amendment to a proposed resolution produced by a committee created by a resolution passed at last year’s national convention.

Resolution 33

DSA first began planning its 2028 presidential strategy at its 2025 national convention, when convention delegates passed Resolution 33: “Unite Labor & the Left to Run a Socialist For President and Build the Party.” As the name suggests, this resolution called on DSA to form an electoral coalition with like-minded unions and progressive groups that could recruit and endorse a presidential candidate.

Specifically, the resolution called on DSA to work to form a left-labor electoral coalition with like-minded labor unions – including United Auto Workers, National Nurses United, Service Employees International Union, Communications Workers of America and United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America– and the Working Families Party and Vermont Progressive Party.

Procedurally, Resolution 33 did two things.

First it created a Presidential Exploratory Committee, composed of members of various DSA caucuses, to explore the possibility of DSA running a presidential candidate in 2028. The resolution directed the Presidential Exploratory Commission to submit a report to the NPC prior to DSA’s 2027 national convention.

Resolution 33 also authorized DSA’s National Political Committee to participate in a left-labor electoral coalition, should one actually be created. But it included a specific caveat to ensure DSA wouldn’t be forced to back a candidate that other organizations in the coalition supported but DSA’s own membership did not: “If a coalition that DSA is a member of decides to endorse a presidential candidate, the NPC shall hold a national all-member referendum on whether to endorse that candidate.”

So far, no left-labor coalition has come into being, which means much of Resolution 33 is moot.

A modest proposal

In the absence of a real left-labor coalition, the Presidential Exploratory Committee proposed at the July meeting a multistep presidential endorsement process for DSA to adopt. The proposal assumes most candidates will announce their campaigns between January and April 2027 and calls on the National Political Committee to begin a 45-day endorsement deliberation period no later than April 1.

During those 45 days, the National Political Committee is supposed to hold a virtual forum open to all DSA members featuring the candidates (or if it’s just AOC, candidate) and individual chapters are supposed to hold meetings to discuss the candidates and poll their members on whether DSA should endorse anyone.

The PEC proposal also calls for “an all-member, non-binding poll regarding member preferences among the nominated candidates for the 2028 election.” If there are multiple candidates nominated for endorsement, then the poll would be ranked choice; if there’s only one person – perhaps a certain congressional representative from New York – being considered, it would be a straight “yes” or “no” poll.

Once the 45-day deliberation period ends, the National Political Committee would have three days to vote on whether and which candidate to endorse. Assuming the 45-day endorsement deliberation period begins on April 1, the last possible day, the NPC would need to vote on the endorsement by May 19. The proposal also envisions a limited role for the DSA national convention, held in August 2027, which would “vote to approve a final campaign plan and settle other political questions related to the 2028 presidential endorsement.” But the real power to endorse lies with the NPC.

The NPC is heavily polarized – nine members belong to either Socialist Majority Caucus or Groundwork, while 14 members belong to “left” caucuses that are more skeptical of AOC – and it’s not clear that NPC members would actually be moved by the results of the all-member poll, even if it showed that a clear majority of members support endorsing AOC.

One poll, two poll

It might seem duplicative to have each chapter poll its members, and then also conduct an additional poll of all members. But these two approaches reflect two different conceptions of democratic decision-making, and each are favored by different internal factions within DSA.

Many of the “left” caucuses and groups within DSA – such as Marxist Unity Group, Springs of Revolution and Red Star – believe that true democracy requires deliberation. They feel that online polls of DSA’s full membership just amount to popularity contests vulnerable to vote-whipping operations and worry that members won’t necessarily make a considered decision before casting their vote.

The “right” caucuses within DSA – particularly Socialist Majority Caucus and Groundwork – believe that true democracy means that everyone has a chance to vote, regardless of whether they deliberate first. They see the “left” caucuses’ insistence on deliberation as a form of anti-democratic gatekeeping that particularly disenfranchises DSA members with disabilities or who are working class and don’t have the ability to attend countless deliberative meetings.

(If these arguments sound familiar, it’s because DSA already had this exact debate at last year’s national convention, over a series of resolutions known as “One Member, One Vote.”)

Ahead of the meeting Sunday, Marxist Unity Group and Springs of Revolution jointly proposed an amendment to the Presidential Exploratory Committee proposal that eliminates the all-member, nonbinding poll. They worry that a simple “yes”/“no” online poll could result in many DSA members instinctively voting in favor of endorsing AOC simply because they like her and want her to be president, without fully considering how DSA will relate to her presidential campaign.

Groundwork defended the importance of an all-member poll, writing that only a single poll of all members would be rigorous enough to show there’s a consensus candidate, be that AOC or anyone else. A similar all-member poll was conducted in 2019 and showed overwhelming support for endorsing U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders in the 2020 presidential election, and DSA went on to endorse him, even though he wasn’t a member of the group.

Reform & Revolution, another caucus, tried to thread this needle by proposing their own secondary amendment to the Marxist Unity Group/Springs of Revolution amendment, which would have restored the all-member poll while making it more nuanced. Rather than asking DSA members whether to endorse a candidate, Reform & Revolution wanted to offer them three options: DSA not endorsing a candidate, DSA endorsing a candidate and then organizing in coordination with the presidential campaign or DSA organizing an independent expenditure group in support of the campaign with its own messaging (which is Reform & Revolution’s preferred strategy). The amendment also called for the all-member poll to “include a space for members to write out their holistic assessment and analysis of the election and the political landscape.”

The convention option

Marxist Unity Group and Springs of Revolution also proposed a second amendment, which would take the endorsement decision out of the hands of the National Political Committee and into the hands of delegates to the 2027 national convention.

While the national convention is DSA’s highest decision-making body and outranks even the NPC, the 2027 national convention won’t be held until that August, by which point the 2028 Democratic presidential primary will already be in full swing.

To get around that issue, the amendment doesn’t actually say the decision should be made during the national convention: It says all the delegates to the 2027 national convention – who must be chosen by May 31 – should hold their own virtual “Presidential Strategy Conference” to debate the endorsement once the chapters finish deliberating and polling their members. Under the proposal, the conference has to be planned by mid-June – before the 2027 national convention.

NPC weighs in

In the days leading up to the NPC vote on Sunday, Socialist Majority Caucus and Groundwork mobilized supporters to pressure NPC members to vote to keep the all-member online poll. Groundwork sent a text message to DSA members warning them of the upcoming vote, and more than 1,000 people signed an open letter calling on the NPC to “let us vote on whether DSA will endorse a candidate for president in 2028.”

In the end, the NPC voted to pass the first Marxist Unity Group/Springs of Revolution amendment (which eliminated the all-member poll) while rejecting the Reform & Revolution secondary amendment (which would have restored a more nuanced all-member poll). That means DSA members will only be able to participate in the endorsement process by attending chapter meetings and voting in chapter-specific polls.

The NPC didn’t make a formal decision on the second Marxist Unity Group/Springs of Revolution amendment or on the underlying proposal itself, instead kicking it back to the Presidential Exploratory Committee for further revisions. As of now, it’s still undecided whether the final presidential endorsement decision will be made by NPC in May 2027, by the national convention in August 2027 or by a newly created Presidential Strategy Conference some time next summer.

It’s also unclear whether Ocasio-Cortez will even run for president, or instead run for U.S. Senate do something else entirely, leaving DSA to an even more complicated debate over whether to support another progressive contender. The only thing that is certain is that there will not be an online poll of all DSA members about the endorsement.

]]>

A brief history of New York City’s neverending horse carriage controversy

Chantal Mann — Tue, 14 Jul 2026 17:35:01 -0400

In a city as disagreement-prone as New York, even horses have the power to divide us.

New York City politicians have wrestled for decades with the controversial horse carriage industry, trying to balance the protests of animal rights activists claiming the practice is abusive with the defense of local unions in support of carriage operators’ livelihoods. The topic emerged as a key issue in the 2013 and 2025 mayoral elections.

Outrage has boiled over in the past few years as multiple horses have died in Midtown since 2020, and the push for a ban increased after an 18-year-old tourist died after falling off an out-of-control carriage in June.

But after years of this seemingly endless horse race, the end may finally be in sight, with Mayor Zohran Mamdani and City Council Speaker Julie Menin both publicly supporting banning horse carriages – and Menin specifically supporting the council’s revised bill to end the industry. As the City Council prepares to hold a July 15 hearing on the bill, here’s the almost 200-year history of the city’s war on horses.

1832

Horse cars are first used in New York City as a mass transportation vehicle for the New York and Harlem Railroad.

1863

Tourist horse carriage rides begin in Central Park, five years after the park opens to the public.

1866

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals forms in response to horse carriage abuse in New York City, with the organization’s official seal depicting an operator beating a horse.

1981

The Horse Licensing and Protection Law is passed by the City Council, requiring horses to observe speed limits, wear lights or reflectors, and wear $25 a year license tags.

1986

The Carriage Horse Action Committee is formed to help advance council legislation to restrict the horse carriage industry.

1989

New York City Council Member Robert Dryfoos’ bill – which regulated when and where carriage horses could operate – goes into effect after the council overrides Mayor Ed Koch’s veto.

2006

The Coalition to Ban Horse-Drawn Carriages forms in response to a 5-year-old horse who was injured, and later euthanized, after being spooked and crashing into a station wagon.

2007

City Comptroller Bill Thompson releases the first audit of the city’s horse carriage industry, revealing issues such as insufficient access to water and a heightened risk of overheating for the animals. Later that year, Council Member Tony Avella introduces a bill to ban the industry.

2008

Horse carriage operators join the Teamsters Local 553 labor union.

Mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa joins a protest to ban horse carriages on August 6, 2025. / Spencer Platt/Getty Images

2010

Council Member Melissa Mark-Viverito introduces a bill to replace horse-drawn carriages with electric vehicles.

2013

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, an outspoken horse carriage defender, runs in a crowded Democratic mayoral primary. Anti-horse carriage organization NYCLASS launches a campaign opposing Quinn’s candidacy and boosting her opponent Bill de Blasio, who promises to disband the industry as his first order of business.

2016

A bill championed by de Blasio, which would have limited horse carriages to Central Park, is defeated after the council – lead, ironically, by now-Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito – cancels a vote on the bill.

2018

De Blasio’s Department of Transportation issues a new rule mandating where horse carriages can wait for passengers, moving from Central Park South to five new locations within the perimeter of the park.

2020

Horse carriage operators join Transport Workers Union Local 100.

2022

A 14-year-old carriage horse named Ryder collapses in Hell’s Kitchen and is later euthanized due to cancer, renewing calls to abolish the industry from animal rights activists.

2024

Council Member Bob Holden introduces Ryder’s Law, which aims to wind down the industry by stopping the issuance of new operation licenses.

2025

The Central Park Conservancy, the nonprofit in charge of managing the park, releases a statement after years of neutrality calling for a ban on horse-drawn carriages. That same year, Mayor Eric Adams issues an executive order to phase out the industry. But Ryder’s Law fails to move, as the council’s Health Committee votes against sending the bill to the full council.

2026

Ryder’s Law is reintroduced by Council Member Christopher Marte, two days after a carriage horse collapses and dies in Central Park. The next week, 18-year-old tourist Romanch Mahajan dies after falling out of a carriage after the operator lost control of the horse. Ryder’s Law was then renamed Romanch’s Law, and Council Speaker Julie Menin schedules a hearing for the bill on July 15.

]]>

Why Mamdani won’t take off that damn suit

Fariha Rahman — Tue, 14 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

White button down. Suit jacket in dark colors only – never flashy, or God forbid, tan. Sharp, sometimes colorful tie.

Whether on a boat in triple-digit temperatures or playing pickup soccer, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has gotten a reputation for adhering to his uniform. That uniform, well-noticed during his mayoral campaign and his early days in office, has grown more remarkable in the summer heat. Last month, he jumped into a pool fully suited up, down to the dress socks, prompting CNN’s Sara Sidner to present him with a pair of swim trunks on top of the Empire State Building during their 4th of July broadcast.

It’s typical for a government official to wear a suit, but some of his recent predecessors seemed to relish going business casual when given the opportunity. Eric Adams sported his mayoral-branded polos at parades. Bill de Blasio knew his way around pool wear.

Remember The Summer of Bill? / Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office

But Mamdani has set himself apart from former mayors by making it clear: The suit stays on.

As a 33-year-old Assembly member running for mayor against established Democratic politicians – most notably, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo – Mamdani was doubted as an unserious candidate with relatively paltry government experience. The basic suit-and-tie uniform seemed aimed at dressing for the job he wanted – or, at least, what New Yorkers were used to seeing from their mayor.

But in his previous role in the Assembly, his uniform looked a bit different. As an Assembly candidate, Mamdani introduced himself in 2020 wearing a kurta. The collarless tunic represented his own Indian heritage, and the diversity of the western Queens district he was running to represent, which includes significant Muslim, Middle Eastern and North African populations. He wore the kurta in campaign literature, and after he became the first South Asian man elected to the Assembly, he even donned a blue kurta in his official Assembly headshot, standing out in a sea of suits and ties.

It wasn’t a stunt, said Amit Singh Bagga, a Democratic consultant and former aide to Gov. Kathy Hochul. “He was being representational. It was serious, but so people were paying attention to him.”

Then-Assembly Member Zohran Mamdani stuck out from the crowd. / New York state Assembly

But the culturally expressive way he dressed as a state representative for Astoria didn’t follow him to the mayoral race.

On the night before his mayoral campaign launch, Mamdani turned to his team and asked them if they thought he should wear a suit. They all agreed he should, recalled Andrew Epstein, who went on to serve as his communications director during the campaign. “And then he basically never took it off,” said Epstein.

In one of his earlier viral moments on the campaign trail, he did the polar bear plunge at Coney Island in a full suit. That video gained hundreds of thousands of views, and was likely some New Yorkers’ first introduction to him.

Several people close to Mamdani – and those who have closely watched his evolution – offered a handful of theories on the switch, no single one necessarily in opposition to another.

One argument for the jacket and tie is that it helps to counter arguments that Mamdani’s socialist politics are unserious. “He’s somebody who thinks that the left should be organized and professional in their presentation at all times, and I think he’s shown a lot of success with that,” Epstein said.

Another is that the suit and tie is legible to the whole city. “He wants to convey a universalism with the suit in a city known for its incredible diversity, that is read by everyone in the same way,” said Brooklyn borough historian Asad Dandia, who is close with Mamdani. His swap to the suit aligned with his switch from being a representative for just Astoria, to a representative for all of New York City. “I think part of that is he wants something that’s more universally recognized. Kurtas are universally recognized mostly by Desis (South Asians), and maybe some who are cultured enough to understand, but I think part of it has to do with the universalism of a suit anywhere in the world. You wear a suit, people know you’re serious.”

To create the new identity, then-Assembly Member Mamdani had to start to do away with his old brand. “If there’s a single mayor in the last 25 years who is conscious of branding? It’s Zohran Mamdani,” Dandia added.

Asad Dandia with Mamdani in August 2024, after discussing his upcoming mayoral campaign launch. / Asad Dandia

As the mayor of firsts – first Asian, first born in Africa and first Muslim mayor – Mamdani has faced harsh racism and Islamophobia both on the campaign trail and since taking office. Paired together, Mamdani’s well-dressed manner and consistent positive demeanor appear to some as a defense mechanism.

The suit and the smile "can have another impact, consciously or unconsciously, to undermine those same kind of Islamophobic or racist ideas about Muslim or immigrant men,” Epstein said. They may have a “disarming effect.” Or, he ventured, the mayor just have “a resting smiling face.”

Wearing a suit and tie didn’t stop those attacks, Epstein noted, highlighting the Islamophobic mailer created for the pro-Cuomo super PAC Fix the City that featured a digitally altered beard on Zohran Mamdani. (The Cuomo campaign called the proposed mailer “disrespectful.”) But, Epstein said, “I suppose one could safely speculate they would have been even worse or more intense if he was wearing a kurta on the trail.”

Even as his wardrobe changed, Mamdani said he hasn’t. In an April 2025 interview, he told GQ, “I am the same person who’s wearing a Kitenge suit that was tailored in Kansaga, Kampala, Uganda, and East Africa, and I am the same guy who’s wearing a Bandhgala that was tailored in Delhi. And I am the same guy who’s wearing the suit from 30th Avenue that I bought from Morgan.”

Since winning the mayoral election and taking office in City Hall, Mamdani has only rarely veered away from his suits – his “‘bat costume’ if you will,” said Dandia. Now the few times he has gone more casual, it’s made the news and started a discourse.

Mamdani celebrates Eid-al-Adha in an Arsenal FC thobe, with AOC in the Bronx. / Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office

Mamdani wears very short shorts at the 2k for 2-K race at Fort Tryon Park. / Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office

“It’s the image that he has to present as the face of socialism in New York City and beyond, that he's wearing a full suit in 105-degrees weather,” said Ella Devi Weerackody, a Parsons student, DSA member and Mamdani fan who has made viral videos about the intersection of politics and fashion. “He knows his responsibility and he also knows that he is trapped within this suit – that if he wears shorts to work, that’s all the New York Post is going to talk about for the next two weeks.”

Another mayor of firsts could also be inspiring his outfit choices: David Dinkins, the first Black mayor, and a democratic socialist.

“I think it’s ironic because the perception we have of leftists is a perception that they don’t necessarily dress formally,” said Dandia. “In fact, in some leftist circles, formal dress is even frowned upon. It’s viewed as a symbol of colonialism, the establishment, all of these things. And then you have these two left-wing mayors, David Dinkins and Zohran Mamdani, who portray the exact opposite. These are left-wing men of color who wore suits everywhere they went.”

Dandia suggested Mamdani is reclaiming the suit. “He’s saying that this is not just something for the Anglo-Saxon class but that an African born, Asian, Shia Muslim socialist can embody all of these things just as well as anyone else,” said Dandia.

The suit also has the ease of a uniform. “He is the mayor, which is like Mickey Mouse in Disney World,” said Skye Ostreicher, founder of In the Room Media and creator of the political fashion show Style Across the Aisle. “Any of these costume characters, you see them, you recognize them, because they look the same all the time. Their hair is the same, their outfits are the same … There he is in the same outfit, he looks how he looks on TV, like that's him,” she said. “Undoubtedly that’s the mayor.”

Will it last? “He’s committed himself to the suit, he can’t escape the suit now,” Weerackody said. “The suit has to go with him for the rest of his mayoral days.”

]]>

Editor’s note: De Blasio talks to the Irish, Italians and Mamdani

Jeff Coltin — Tue, 14 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

Bill de Blasio is summering in Italy. And visiting Northern Ireland too. Five years out of office, the former mayor of the greatest city in the world has been sharing his hard-earned lessons in various corners of Europe.

That meant headlining a May event in Perugia with Italian Partito Democratico leader Elly Schlein – then seeing a mural unveiled at the Port of Naples, which included a depiction of his own grandparents.

That also meant speaking in Belfast at a historic conference uniting the mayors of every city on the island – from both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

It was a paid appearance, organized in part by his former “Nightlife Mayor” Ariel Palitz, who’d previously advised Belfast leaders on the bar scene. But the conference was appealing to de Blasio politically, as it brought together leaders of cities that had once been divided by war.

“It was very much connected to what’s happened all over the world, which is this decentralization movement,” he said, “where more and more localities are demanding more power, more resources, because national governments are consistently failing to address real issues.”

And no, even after Italy and (Northern) Ireland, he hasn’t been to Israel in many years. “The ‘three I’s’ are definitely a thing of the past,” de Blasio told me.

It’s a nice semi-retirement for the ex-pol, who can also be heard as a political pundit stateside.

“The opportunity is always there, whether here or elsewhere, to try and contribute politically. And it’s something I love to put my time and energy into,” de Blasio said. “I like to contribute to the movement wherever and however I can.”

That could include conversations with the new mayor, Zohran Mamdani. De Blasio is a big fan, and he told me they’ve talked recently – but declined to share details of the conversation.

This week, as City & State lays out the new rules for politics in 2026, de Blasio is sticking to his own rule: “As a former mayor, you cannot be presumptuous. Offer help when it’s valuable, and stand back otherwise.”

It’s easy to see that de Blasio helped write the book for politics today. He ran on affordability, decrying the “tale of two cities.” He froze the rent. And he advocated taxing the rich to fund universal pre-K.

De Blasio is happy to see Mamdani doing it. He “believe(s) in him intensely, and (is) really, really happy with the way he's handling things.” He just hopes more Democrats nationally will learn the new rules.

“The identification with the status quo can be fatal, rightfully,” he said. “Democrats who truly embrace the message of progressive economic populism can beat Republicans consistently. The problem with the Democratic Party in so many places is they haven’t been willing to take that risk and embrace, for example, a consistent call for more taxes on the wealthy.”

]]>

State lawmakers eye LGBTQ+ caucus in Albany

Rebecca C. Lewis — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 13:56:03 -0400

The state Legislature is poised to have the most out-LGBTQ+ members in its history at the start of the next year. Now, both current and likely incoming lawmakers are saying it’s time the body formed an LGBTQ+ caucus to formally advocate for issues important to the community.

After last month’s Democratic primary elections, the state Senate is set to have at least three out-LGBTQ+ members: state Sens. Jabari Brisport and Erik Bottcher, and likely incoming state Sen. Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas. The Assembly is set to have at least seven out members: Assembly Members Tony Simone, Diana Moreno and Harry Bronson, and likely incoming Assembly Members Brian Romero, David Orkin, Christian Celeste Tate and Illapa Saritupac. That number could go up to eight if David Siffert, who is nonbinary, wins their recount in a lower Manhattan race, set to take place Monday.

All told, that’s at least 10 members between both chambers in the Legislature next year. Romero, who won a primary in western Queens last month, said he’s already had some conversations with members about creating a caucus for the first time. “There is a lot of excitement and appetite for such a space,” Romero told City & State. He cited both the historic numbers and ongoing attacks from the federal administration against especially transgender people as reasons the time has come to formally organize the Legislature’s LGBTQ+ voices.

Among those members that Romero has spoken to about the prospect is Simone, who said he too has reached out to some of his colleagues in both chambers. “I think we can’t just be on the defensive as an LGBTQ, queer community,” he told City & State. “We have to be on offense, and representation matters.”

The state Legislature has a number of different formal caucuses, including well known bodies like the Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic and Asian Caucus, which regularly puts out policy agendas and advocate for the joint priorities of members. Both Romero and Simone envision something similar, with an executive director and with shared policy goals the caucus would push for. “I think we'll have a fierce force in Albany when it comes to issues affecting our community, from hate crimes to funding to make sure gay homeless youth are not ignored in the budget,” Simone said.

In addition to advocating for specific policies, Romero said an organized, formal caucus could provide out LGBTQ+ members an opportunity to better educate their colleagues on the issues affecting their communities. “I think what we’ve been seeing across the country is unfortunately, a lot of Democrats scapegoat trans communities and throw them under the bus out of fear that they will cost us seats or whatever the reason is,” he said. “And I think that's absolutely the wrong take on this.”

Although the New York City Council has had an LGBTQIA+ Caucus for years, this would be a first for the state Legislature. And advocates are ready to see it happen. “New York is the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement, and we have built a reputation as a safe haven for queer people across the country and around the world,” Kei Williams, executive director of the New Pride Agenda, said in a statement. “This is a sign of renewed statewide momentum, particularly in light of the NYC Mayor’s creation of the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”

Current and incoming out LGBTQ+ members of the Legislature are still only in preliminary conversations about forming a caucus. Eventually, they’ll need to speak with leadership to move forward with formal recognition and to receive funding for their efforts.

]]>

Child support cases see citywide speed up

Chantal Mann — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 11:53:33 -0400

A 2025 family court pilot program in New York City may have significantly sped up wait times for child support orders throughout the five boroughs, a new report by the legal services nonprofit Her Justice found.

A Brooklyn parent seeking a court order for child support in 2022 had to wait an average of 18 months to obtain the order. But by 2025, courts ordered support in an average of 4.3 months – shaving more than a year off the time, in the backed-up family court system.

The report analyzed nearly 800,000 of the state’s anonymized child support filings from 2019 and from 2022 to 2025. And while support cases have gotten resolved faster across the state, the most dramatic improvement was in Brooklyn, which first launched a new triage process for cases halfway through the year.

Triage helps streamline the process for families who are not in conflict about the available income for children and don’t require extensive litigation, which “creates an opportunity for families who agree on support and want to reach settlements to reach an agreement that day,” Rachel Braunstein, the senior director of policy at Her Justice, told City & State. “And then they're on their way instead of being in court for two plus years.”

The program was later expanded to family courts in Queens and The Bronx, which also saw improved disposition times. The Her Justice report notes that the results are “promising,” but incomplete, since there were still open 2025 cases when the data was obtained.

The COVID-19 pandemic added enormous strain to the court system’s case backlog, with criminal and civil cases dragging on even years after the pandemic. Family courts in New York City were hit especially hard, with some courts closing for child support filings in 2020 and 2021 and leaving many families with limited or no access to the court.

There were more than 130,000 child support filings in 2025, making up 30% of all family court filings – and, according to the report, over 90% of the parents involved in those cases do not have legal representation.

“Critical need is in child support being addressed by the child support courts. And at the same time, it's a huge burden,” Braunstein said. “We think the trends shown in our analysis are quite promising, and we understand that the courts think this intervention of the triage pilots with a settlement component is very promising.”

]]>

The 26 new rules for elections in ’26

City & State — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

Want to write a political speech in 2026? All you need is a noun, a verb and the word “affordable.”

Want to win an election in 2026? That’s a little more complicated.

The results haven’t been certified yet in the primaries, but it’s clear that Zohran Mamdani’s 2025 win wasn’t a one-off fluke. Instead, some of the fundamentals of politics have changed in New York. You can’t be caught running the same strategies you learned from a VHS tape in a TikTok world.

There’s not just a 24-hour news cycle now, there’s a 24-hour content cycle. New Yorkers are prioritizing energy over experience. And voters are a lot more forgiving than they used to be – though it seems sexual assault allegations will still sink a campaign.

Of course, like Calvinball in the newspaper comics, the rules of New York politics are made up as we go. So read up on the latest edition, before it all changes again.

]]>

New rules: You don’t need labor during an election; you need them after

Sahalie Donaldson — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

If recent elections in New York City have taught us anything, it’s that the axis of political power is shifting. The biggest organized labor unions, long regarded as major power brokers in city politics, haven’t been immune to this seismic reshuffling.

Take last year’s Democratic mayoral primary where a young democratic socialist triumphed over a political goliath. Zohran Mamdani defeated Andrew Cuomo in June 2025 without any support from major labor unions, bucking historical precedent. Rather than take a chance on the lefty upstart, the Hotel and Gaming Trades Council, building service workers union 32BJ SEIU, healthcare union 1199SEIU, the United Federation of Teachers and the New York City District Council of Carpenters hedged their bets with Cuomo and a few of the other well-known candidates in the race. Municipal workers union District Council 37 was a rare exception – and even then, they ranked Mamdani second, behind then-City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams.

But Mamdani’s victory wasn’t a one-off. With his support, democratic socialists Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier also defeated well-funded, establishment opponents in congressional races last month without the support of traditional labor powerhouses. Brad Lander, in a slightly different boat given the relationships he’d forged with unions as a council member and city comptroller, had the support of 32BJ SEIU, though most played it safe by sticking with Rep. Dan Goldman.

“Labor still has influence in elections and obviously in terms of public policy,” Democratic political consultant Eli Valentin said. “But there is certainly a shift happening, one that says a lot about broader shifts that are occurring politically in New York and elsewhere.”

Union support alone has never won elections. An array of complex factors and calculations spell the difference between victory and defeat. Historically though, the overarching sentiment has been that they do matter – so much so, candidates sometimes start vying for labor backing before they jump into a race. Beyond giving endorsees an air of legitimacy in the eyes of voters and the political class, labor unions are seen as vehicles to reach New Yorkers within their own ranks and beyond, capable of deploying volunteers and financial resources in mass. Mamdani, Valdez, Avila Chevalier and even Lander’s victories challenge long held beliefs about how much these things matter.

In last month’s congressional races, for example, Big Labor spent millions in support of Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso, who dominated Valdez in endorsements from labor and mainstream Democrats. Same goes for Assembly Member Alex Bores, who ultimately fell to fellow state lawmaker Micah Lasher in the crowded Manhattan race to succeed Rep. Jerry Nadler, and Rep. Adriano Espaillat, the longtime incumbent unseated by Avila Chevalier in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx. Money was only a piece of it. Labor leaders coalesced around their chosen candidates, standing shoulder to shoulder with Reynoso, Bores, Espaillat and Goldman during rallies. All four lost. State legislative races were more of a mixed bag in terms of how labor-backed candidates fared, but big questions about their clout in elections remain.

There’s no solid answers about what it all means. Some would argue that organized labor’s electoral power is dwindling – and it has been for some time, prior even to Mamdani’s victory. That’s not a New York City thing. “The power of labor unions in New York and the way in which it is waning in elections is not something that is unique to New York,” one Democratic strategist said. “Democratic voters coast to coast are completely fed up and frustrated with the way the party is going, and unions and the party are very synonymous.”

For others, it’s more of an evolution – one that organized labor needs to evolve with.

“Endorsements have to mean something,” said Brandon Mancilla, the director of United Auto Workers Region 9A. “More of the question is not that the influence of labor is waning or anything like that. It’s that the influence of labor may be waning only because we’re allowing it to.”

He’s earned the right to say so. UAW’s local chapter, a relatively small union representing a diverse array of academics and human service workers, has had massive success in recent elections.

After backing Mamdani in the Democratic mayoral primary, UAW got behind Lander, Valdez and Avila Chevalier early on, further solidifying the progressive union’s reputation for backing long-shot lefty candidates that defied expectations. Pointing to Valdez, a former organizer for UAW, and Avila Chevalier, another one of its rank-and-file members, Mancilla attributed the group’s success to recruiting from within to run for office. That, and hitting the ground in force. Lacking the robust resources of the city’s biggest labor groups, UAW’s rank-and-file members canvassed the old-fashioned way, reaching more than 50,000 voters by knocking on doors.

“Our political process is very member-led, so we knew in making these endorsements we were going to have the capacity to actually get out there and organize for these candidates,” Mancilla said.

And the candidates are keeping the relationship going in turn. A week after winning, Lander, Valdez and Avila Chevalier marched on back-to-back UAW picket lines.

“What UAW is doing right now is building a truly democratic union that is getting its members out to doors, asking them to talk to each other about these great political questions of our time,” Valdez said. “That’s what I want to see every single union do.”

Lander described the recent election cycle as a wake-up call – both for unions and the Democratic Party.

“Unions are going to need to experiment with new and bigger organizing strategies and with more aggressive and creative political strategies in order to build enough power to win for working people,” Lander said. “You just have to remember what you’re supposed to do is listen to your constituents if you are an elected official, your members if you’re a union, and when things aren’t working for them, try something new.”

So don’t count the unions out. One political labor veteran cautioned against painting the implications of recent elections on labor with too broad of a brush. Upon taking office, elected officials need unions – regardless of whether they did or didn’t support them when they were a candidate.

“Unless these (new politicians) get corrupted and become mainstream very quickly, if they mean what they say – and I think most of them do – this wave should be good for labor unions,” they said. “The unions that are the most sophisticated should be able to reenergize their own base and their members and their engagement and end up with being in a mutually beneficial dynamic.”

– with reporting by Rebecca C. Lewis

]]>

The 2026 Who’s Who in Insurance

City & State — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

During state budget talks in Albany this year, one of the biggest battles was over insurance. In January, Gov. Kathy Hochul rolled out a package of bills that her administration asserted would crack down on auto insurance fraud and implement other reforms that would ultimately lower rates for consumers. But lawmakers pushed back, arguing that some of the governor’s proposed changes, such as limiting damages, could shortchange New Yorkers injured in car crashes. In the end, the governor forced through much of her insurance agenda, resetting various rules governing the industry.

These sweeping changes are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to insurance legislation and regulations in New York – whether it has to do with property and casualty insurance, health insurance or life insurance. City & State’s Who’s Who in Insurance highlights the key players at the intersection of insurance and government in New York, including elected officials, policymakers, regulators, trade association leaders, business executives, entrepreneurs and advocates.

]]>

How Jordan Wright held off the DSA

Rebecca C. Lewis — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 04:30:00 -0400

As a socialist wave overtook New York in last month’s primaries, with candidates endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America winning across New York City and beyond, one incumbent remained standing. In Harlem’s Assembly District 70, Jordan Wright held off an insurgent challenge from Conrad Blackburn, even as several of other sitting lawmakers got bested by a member of the DSA-endorsed slate. And he also prevailed in a portion of the congressional district that Rep. Adriano Espaillat lost to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier.

Wright is a third-generation Harlem official. His father Keith Wright is a former member of the Assembly who heads the Manhattan Democratic Party, and his late grandfather Bruce Wright was a judge. The sitting Assembly member’s victory in June was a rare dynastic victory at a time when traditional party machines and political family influence is dwindling. But Wright doesn’t attribute his win to his family name. He sat down with City & State to discuss how old-fashioned, boots-on-the-ground campaigning led him to success where so many others failed in the primary, and what to take away from it. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

What in your campaign do you think you did that propelled you to victory, while others with DSA challengers lost?

We’ve been working very hard in Harlem for a long period of time. My team and I knocked on a cumulative 40,000 doors, (made any) number of phone calls and just talking to voters at any moment possible, meeting people where they are, helping them understand I’m their Assembly member, what an Assembly member does and why it’s important for Harlem in the community. I’m grateful, eternally grateful, that the community has selected me to be their Assembly member for another two years.

Obviously, you weren’t deeply involved in anyone’s race but your own, but why do you think you won while Rep. Adriano Espaillat lost?

I can speak to why I won. I won because I’ve been working really hard for my community for the past two years. People in the community, they know who I am. They see me in the streets every day. I’m not a mystery. I’m out here, I talk to people – and that’s why I won, because people know me. I’ve been on the community board, obviously. I’ve been the campaign manager and chief of staff for (New York City) Council Member (Yusef) Salaam, and in this community my entire life.

How much do you think the intergenerational presence of the Wright family in Harlem played in this race and your ability to reach voters?

Well, I’ll say this: When I go to senior centers, I go to churches, sometimes I’ll introduce myself. And I’ll introduce parts of what my family has done, and I’m very proud to say that when I mention my grandfather, Judge Bruce Wright, that gets the loudest applause. It’s important to understand the work that he did in the community. It’s important to understand why that work is so important. Just the blessing of my life to be able to continue the family legacy of service.

The mayor didn’t endorse against any incumbent Assembly candidates. His backing can carry a lot of weight. Did the absence of that presence help you or hurt your opponent?

I think the mayor is obviously a very well-liked, very popular politician. As an elected official, I think he’s doing great work. I think he has a lot more great work to do. I’m not sure why he didn’t want to get involved in this race, but one thing I do know is I was able to serve with him in the Assembly. We had a good relationship when we were in the Assembly. I look forward to doing that work with him, no matter what that looks like going forward.

Did you make conscious choices to shore up your left flank in anticipation of a challenge from the DSA? You attended several DSA-organized rallies, like tax the rich events, since the start of the year. Was that intentional?

I’ve been in the New York state Assembly for less than two years still to this point. I’m still growing as a legislator. Any rally you see me at, those are things that I’m there for, not for no other reason than I want to be there for them. I think that I can answer your question directly: No. I’m just legislating and governing, no matter what’s going on around me politically. What's at the core interest for me, as always, are the constituents of the 70th Assembly District, and how it can make life better for them.

Given you succeeded where some of your colleagues in similar circumstances failed, do you think some of them might have taken their seats for granted? Something must have been different for you.

There’s clearly a taste for (the) opportunity for younger folks to be involved again. I’m lucky to be the president of the Manhattan Young Democrats. (At 31 years old,) I’m the youngest elected official we have in Manhattan. I think I’m the third-youngest in the Assembly. So I say that to say, at the end of the day, I’m a young man from this community who wants to do work. People want to see younger people more involved, so I’m happy to be able to say that’s something I have on my side, and I look forward to keeping on doing the work for the community.

There is this view that DSA is a threat to traditional Black political power in places like Harlem and Brooklyn. Do you think your victory refutes that?

It’s a bit of a false equivalence. I think that again, my race was my race. And I think that as far as Harlem is concerned, Harlem came out and Harlem spoke, and I’m happy to have won reelection. I think that in the process, in my first term, I’ve learned a lot so far. I look forward to doing more work in my second term and getting more influence in the New York state Assembly, doing more work, and more than anything else, and just always happy to be a Harlemite.

There was a lot of outside spending in your race, both for you and against your opponent. There were specific ads attacking Blackburn for his past internship with Pam Bondi. Do you think the influx of outside cash influenced the election?

The outside spending, whatever it may be, that didn’t impact the work that I was doing in the community. I think that there’s nothing like good old campaigning, end of the day, and that’s where my brain was mostly focused. Talking to people who are actually going to be voting. Because, (at the) end of the day, politics is a contact sport, and people are going to get contacted.

]]>

Legislation to ban horse carriages nears majority support

Sahalie Donaldson — Fri, 10 Jul 2026 13:28:34 -0400

Legislation to ban horse carriages in New York City is gaining speed ahead of a pivotal City Council hearing next week. Democrat Oswald Feliz has signed on as a cosponsor, becoming the latest member to say “neigh” to the controversial industry, and Rita Joseph is poised to follow, according to a City Council source. Council Member Lynn Schulman, chair of the health committee that will hear the bill, and Majority Whip Kamillah Hanks also joined as sponsors on Friday.

Joseph did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Her support would bring the bill to 22 co-sponsors, nearing the 26 votes needed to pass the legislation. Even more council members are expected to follow their lead, especially once the Committee on Health holds a hearing on the bill Wednesday. City Council Member Linda Lee, chair of the powerful finance committee, is also likely to join supporters as a co-sponsor, but is holding off until after the hearing to make a final decision, another council source said.

The bill, formerly known as Ryder’s Law, was renamed to honor 18-year-old Romanch Mahajan, who was killed falling out of an out-of-control horse carriage in Central Park last month. Support has grown significantly in the wake of Mahajan’s death, building on momentum spurred by the death of a carriage horse a week prior. Efforts to ban the industry have stagnated for years due to fierce opposition by Transport Workers Union Local 100, which represents the industry (even though the drivers are not actually unionized).

City Council Speaker Julie Menin has yet to take an official position, but her decision to call for the upcoming hearing bodes well for supporters – and so does Majority Leader Shaun Abreu joining as a sponsor of the bill. The fact that there are several members of her leadership team who have pledged their support is likely an indication of where Menin herself stands as they wouldn’t join without her blessing. Further bolstering the case against horse-drawn carriages, a recent poll commissioned by the Central Park Conservancy found that 68% of respondents support banning the industry.

Schulman in particular is a notable addition to supporters’ ranks. She’s chair of the Committee on Health, which is where the bill will be heard. More importantly, with her support, that makes five of the nine committee members co-sponsors – a majority, and a marked difference from last year when the legislation died in committee.

“We’re cautiously optimistic. We’ll see how the hearing goes,” Council Member Chris Marte, who sponsors the bill, said. “It’s still going to be a hard battle,” he added. “I don’t think the opposition is going to lighten up just because things are going our way.”

Sure enough, TWU will start running a $75,000 ad-buy on NY1 this weekend calling out Abreu for featuring his goddaughter in the video he released declaring his support for the legislation. “(TWU is) furious that he’s grandstanding and thinks it’s heinous he used his goddaughter … knowing there’s fanatics on different sides of this issue,” TWU International President John Samuelsen told City & State.

NYCLASS, a group that’s long fought to ban horse carriages in New York City, in turn plans to answer with its own six-figure ad buy some time in the next couple of days, according to NYCLASS Co-Founder and President Steve Nislick. The ad will feature the same video of Abreu and his goddaughter that rattled TWU.

]]>

This week’s biggest Winners & Losers

City & State — Fri, 10 Jul 2026 05:00:00 -0400

Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s wedding at Madison Square Garden may have caused some mayhem in Midtown, especially over the holiday weekend and during the World Cup, but hey, it could have been worse. Can you imagine how many more Swifties would have been there if not for the heatwave? While Taylor and Travis were entering their Marriage Era, we were very much in our AC Era. Most people probably aren’t looking forward to seeing their next ConEd bills though – especially those who lost power. To those who actually turned their ACs to 78 degrees as per the mayor’s request: Congrats, you saved a few bucks this month.

]]>