Governor Cuomo and Albany legislators making dollars

NY Post


In a victory for lawmakers, a state judge issued a ruling Friday that upholds legislative pay hikes that took effect in January while striking down restrictions on outside income — thus allowing them to keep their outside gigs.

An executive and legislative compensation committee empaneled by Gov. Cuomo and legislative leaders linked the pay hikes and restrictions on outside income as a part of a package last year.

The base pay for senators and assembly members jumped from $79,500 to $110,000 this year, and is supposed to jump $120,000 next year and $130,000 in 2021.

It also set Cuomo on track to become the nation’s top paid governor, increasing his salary to $200,000 this year, then $225,000 in 2020 and $250,000 in 2021.

This is why Mario's eldest son is running for a fourth term. Especially with the rumors of his rich girlfriend Sandy Lee dumping him.

The biggest and ugliest state budget bill of all includes congestion pricing, plastic bag ban, and more authoritarian powers and an undeserved fat raise for Mario's son Governor Cuomo

New York Times

 After weeks of intraparty bickering, the New York State Legislature and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo on Sunday signed off on a $175 billion budget that was wreathed with progressive initiatives, including changes to the cash bail system, a new tax on high-end homes and a groundbreaking plan to charge motorists to drive into Manhattan’s busiest stretches.

The budget deal was immediately hailed as “transformative” by Mr. Cuomo, and it will clearly have an impact felt far beyond taxpayers’ wallets. The agreement included deals that will likely change the way millions of New Yorkers shop, commute and vote: bans on plastic bags from retail stores, billions in new funds for New York’s troubled subway system and a new paid three-hour break on Election Day.

The budget’s progressive theme was a victory for Mr. Cuomo and the newly elected Democratic majority in the State Legislature, most notably Democrats who helped give the party control of the State Senate for the first time in a decade. They largely lived up to pledges to address big money in politics, raise taxes on the wealthy and overhaul a criminal justice system that disproportionately targets minority communities.

But the deal announced in the wee hours of Sunday morning also showed the limits of those 
campaign promises. Activists criticized a plan to empower small campaign donors as halfhearted. A measure to tax luxury homes was refashioned at the last minute after the powerful real-estate industry intervened. And, perhaps most significant, hopes for legalizing the recreational use of marijuana were dashed, though lawmakers could still approve that later in the legislative session.

Still, for veteran observers of Albany, the sheer variety of issues settled since January — from infrastructure to the environment, from voting rights to transgender rights — was a relief from years of divided government, when interests of Republicans in the Senate often stood in contrast to the state’s overwhelmingly Democratic electorate.

“The process seems very similar,” said Blair Horner, the executive director of the New York Public Interest Research Group, and a former aide to Mr. Cuomo. “But the product is obviously very different because you have a new majority in the Senate.”

Most of the deals announced on Sunday were largely made behind closed doors, and left to the 11th hour: Voting was likely to push right up to, and perhaps past, the midnight deadline.

Chief among the new policies was congestion pricing, which is likely to affect the habits of anyone who works or plays in Manhattan. Under the plan, the first of its type in the nation, vehicles traveling below 60th Street will be subject to a toll, revenue that will be funneled into the city’s beleaguered subways and other regional transportation needs.


Another saw a proposed pied-à-terre tax, an annual recurring tax on second homes that were valued at $5 million or more, eliminated. Although the tax had the backing of state leaders, it evaporated under pressure from real estate interests and legal concerns.

In its place, lawmakers and Mr. Cuomo agreed to a “mansion tax” coupled with a real estate transfer tax, two one-time levies that would be charged at the point of sale on multimillion-dollar homes. The tax rate would top out at 4.15 percent on the sale of properties worth $25 million or more.

A plan to ban plastic bags in the state was also included in the budget, but it makes a fee on paper bags optional, which some environmentalists worry will lessen the popularity of reusable bags. New York would be the second state, after California, to ban plastic bags. (Hawaii also effectively has a ban in place, since all the state’s counties bar such single-use bags.)

New York Post

 Gov. Cuomo just scored a 40 percent pay hike — and it’s not even the Legislature’s biggest gift to him in the new budget.
 
The late-night vote to increase the gov’s compensation — making New York’s chief executive the nation’s highest-paid — was just icing on a very fatty cake:
 
A six-member Traffic Mobility Review Board will fill in all the devilish details on the new tolls for driving in Manhattan below 60th Street — and it’s clear that Cuomo will dominate that panel while preserving his deniability.
 
 The Cuomo-controlled MTA board will get final say over the tolls, as well as how the revenues are used, new MTA Chairman Pat Foye announced. That guarantees the gov will get his way.
 
New rules boost Cuomo’s power by making it easier to replace MTA board members.
 
Mayor de Blasio and the City Council thus wind up with zero power over the new tolls in the town they supposedly run — and no say in how those funds, or the take from new “mansion taxes,” get spent. Yet these are all revenue sources that city agencies, not state ones, should control.
 
The gov also won the ability to remove unruly members from the state’s Public Authorities Control Board — further increasing his power over millions in state grants.
 A new commission will draw up the framework for public financing of state campaigns. Bet that Cuomo will either call the shots, or see that the whole thing blows up if he doesn’t like the results.

With the passage of this budget, Albany has created a gubernatorial monster.

State legislators not getting pay raise

From the Queens Chronicle:

A state-commissioned panel did not vote on raising the pay of state lawmakers at a special meeting on Tuesday, the deadline for which an agreement had to be made.

That means state legislators will return to the capital in January still making a base pay of $79,500, the same amount they’ve been paid since 1999, the last time there was a raise.

They are still the third-highest paid legislators in the country.

Heastie makes his case for legislative pay raises

From the NY Post:

Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie claimed today that lawmakers deserve a raise because they’ve never worked harder.

Ignoring the corruption scandals swirling around Albany, Heastie argued in a letter to the Commission on Legislative, Judicial and Executive Compensation that “the complexity and demands” of a legislator’s job “have dramatically increased.”

He pointed out that legislators’ base salary of $79,500 is now worth $53,997 in real purchasing power because there hasn’t been a pay hike since 1999.

Heastie didn’t mention ethics reform, which has been a point of contention between lawmakers, who claim they passed meaningful changes, and critics who contend they haven’t done enough.

The speaker, a Bronx Democrat, also did not recommend a specific new salary, merely pointing to a rate of inflation of about 2 percent a year.

But he noted that the current salary is modest at best for people living in and around the five boroughs.

If salaries aren’t adjusted, Heastie said only inexperienced, retired, or independently wealthy people would be willing to take the job.

Hmmm... inexperienced means that there wouldn't be decades-long incumbency, retired means they may actually show up for work and independently wealthy means they likely won't take bribes. I think I'll stick with no raises as the way to go.

Increase in legislative pay is questionable

From NY1:

Governor Andrew Cuomo has made its clear that his appointees to the legislative pay commission can control whether or not state lawmakers receive a pay increase.

"You will need my appointees and judicial appointees to approve it," he said.

The Commission held several meetings this year and is expected to deliver its report in November, safely after state lawmakers stand for re-election.

But Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie says that was never part of the agreement. In a statement, Heastie says, "The idea behind the commission was to determine administrative, legislative and statewide elected salaries devoid of any political considerations or agendas. Unfortunately, counter to the purpose of the Commission, there are some who have tried to politicize this process by suggesting legislators testify or trade legislation for a pay increase."

Heastie went on to say Cuomo's budget director recently wrote a letter to the Commission explaining why an increase is necessary for his commissioners. Heastie says he, too, will write a letter on behalf of his legislators. which holds everyone to the same standard.

Raises for all!

From Gotham Gazette:

As New York City Council members voted on a package of legislation that increased their salaries from $112,500 to $148,500, aides to two Council members stood silently in the balcony of the Council chambers, wearing white t-shirts that read, “Paycheck to Paycheck, Pay Raises for All.”

The $36,000 salary bump for Council members is about the same amount of money that many of their staff members make in a year. These are aides filling roles such as communications director, scheduler, and community liaison. Chiefs of staff usually make quite a bit more. At a hearing on the bills two days before the vote, several Council members spoke in support of also providing pay raises to their staff members. The silent demonstration by staffers from the offices of Council Members Inez Barron and Rosie Mendez was itself a coordinated effort done with the support of Barron and Mendez.

City Council members set the salaries of their staff members and decide how many aides to employ - the average staff size is about seven. The amount Council members choose to spend on salaries comes out of their office budgets, which are set by the Council Speaker’s office.

City Council members say that a push to increase member budgets was initiated when it became clear that Council members themselves would be getting raises. In early February, at about the same time the Council was voting through raises for all city elected officials, Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito provided Council members with about $25,000 each in additional funding for their offices.

Yes, these folks totally deserve a raise to ignore your phone calls. That's hard work!

City Council votes for huge pay raise

From AM-NY:

Members of the New York City Council on Friday voted themselves a $36,000 raise — $10,000 higher than an advisory salary panel — to $148,500.

By a vote of 40-7, the council got their first raise since 2006, when the salary went up to $112,500.

“Every dollar is a worthy investment in a government that works full time for the people,” said Councilman Ben Kallos (D-Manhattan), who was one of the legislation’s lead shepherds.

Backers noted that the legislation also prohibits most outside income, eliminates stipends for leadership posts and converts the job of council member to full time from part time.

Council members said they deserved the additional $10,000 because of the outside-income ban, which passed 45-2.

Vallone denounces outside income then introduces bill amendment to allow it

You may recall that during Paul Vallone's 2013 campaign, he stated that if elected, he would close his law practice and focus on being a full time legislator. Well, he did close the eastern branch of Vallone and Vallone, but he soon got busted by the media and by your humble blogger for not exactly being out of the lawyer/lobbyist business.

Yesterday, it was revealed that Vallone plans to introduce an amendment to the salary bill that is to be voted on today, which would allow council members to keep their outside income.

Will the real Paul Vallone please stand up?

City Council members break out the violin

From City Council Watch:

--Ydanis Rodriguez, during the first round of questions, took up his entire allotment yelling at Fritz Schwartz, who headed the Pay Commission. He explained that he loves his job, that he supports the 99%, but that he has to work so hard. He works 60 hours a week! He has to go to community meetings. People talk to him in restaurants. He believes that CMs deserve at least $175,000 per year.

Rodriguez kept coming back to the question of half-time versus full-time. He demanded to know what constitutes full-time, because he puts in so many more hours than that.

It became sadly clear that Ydanis Rodriguez thinks that “full-time” means you work 40 hours and then you go home. If you work more than that, then you deserve overtime. Could it be that he doesn’t understand the difference between an hourly and a salaried employee? Also, does he think that 60 hours a week is an unusual amount of work for a well-paid professional in New York? I know plenty of people who put in those kinds of hours…including Council staffers who make like $30k.

As a former staffer for a council member and a longtime Watcher, I have a pretty good idea of what members do. I am curious if Rodriguez counts the following activities when he adds up his hours: attending press conferences for civic groups, or to “save” El Diario; going to meetings of the Progressive Caucus; going to meetings of the Black, Latino and Asian Caucus; going to meetings of the Democratic Caucus; going to meetings of the Manhattan delegation; getting plaques from local organizations; going to ribbon-cutting ceremonies; talking to other electeds; running for Speaker; sending out weather bulletins or press releases condemning a vicious criminal, etc. etc.

Rodriguez also claimed that some CMs “have Ph.Ds.” Is this true? I’ve never heard that. Unless he is thinking about Eva Moskowitz.

--Inez Dickens was mad that no one is taking into account all the groceries and funerals she pays for, for her needy constituents. She said that unlike other elected officials, CMs “are on the streets!”

--Ben Kallos also said that CMs never have time off. “If it is Christmas Eve and you are locking up your district office, and a resident comes by because he is being evicted, well there is no Christmas Eve dinner for you.” He contrasted this to citywide elected officials who supposedly don’t have to deal with constituents’ needs. Somehow he insinuated that he works harder than Michael Bloomberg ever did, which seems like a weird thing to say given Bloomberg’s reputation for total workaholicism. (Bloomberg once said, "I have nothing in common with people who stand on escalators.") Fritz Schwartz said that, when he was Corporation Counsel, he saw Bloomberg work quite a bit. Kallos sneered, “Um, I don’t weekend in Bermuda.”

--Jumaane Williams is insulted that lowly commissioners and deputy commissioners often make more than he does. Why should a staffperson make more money than an exalted elected official? It was pointed out that some deputy commissioners run billion dollar departments and have hundreds of people reporting to them; Williams was nonplussed at this, and seemed to want to say, “So do I!” But of course, he doesn’t.

--Brad Lander repeated his glib refrain that “It is easy to be cynical” about council members’ pay. It is especially easy to be cynical about it when one is given so much material for cynicism.

Amazingly enough, Lander will not even be present on Friday to vote on the bill. How come? He is going on vacation that day. Sure, just taking off a few days in February when he thought the hearing calendar was clear, two weeks before the whole Council goes on its unofficial mid-Winter break. Doesn’t everybody do that?

What f---ing gall.

The Daily News thinks so, too.

Lined up at the trough

From the NY Post:

In a stunning move, City Council members are mulling even fatter raises for themselves than the 23 percent boost recommended by a mayor-appointed panel, sources told The Post Wednesday.

The 51-member council on Feb. 5 is expected to push through a hefty raise package for all elected city officials that could include boosting council members’ salaries to as high as $150,000, the sources said. The council is also expected to approve Mayor de Blasio’s controversial plan to shrink the carriage-horse industry and move its entire operation within Central Park.

A three-member panel convened by Blasio last month recommended council members’ salaries rise from $112,500 to $138,315 and that Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito get a 37-percent pay hike to $154,375.

But some council members have privately griped about wanting higher raises — which would be their first since 2006 — because they’re being forced to give up annual “lulu” bonuses of $8,000 to $25,000 each for chairing committees.

Raises all around

From CBS 2:

Mayor Bill de Blasio has accepted recommendations by a panel that city elected officials should get raises in exchange for a ban on outside jobs.

De Blasio sent a letter to City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito on Wednesday formally accepting the recommendations of the independent Quadrennial Commission.

The three-person panel recommended a 23 percent, or $25,815, raise for City Council members, which would raise their pay from $112,500 to $138,315 a year.

The commission also recommended banning most outside employment for Council members in order to prevent conflicts of interest.

De Blasio’s salary would rise by 15 percent, or more than $33,000, from $225,000 to $258,750 under the recommendations. But de Blasio has said he will not accept a raise this term.

Mark-Viverito’s salary would rise 37 percent.

Guess who's getting a raise

From the Daily News:

A city commission recommended pay raises for all the city’s elected officials in a report issued Monday.

The commission said the mayor, City Council, public advocate, controller, borough presidents and district attorneys should all get pay boosts of at least 12%, with some getting more generous boosts.

The City Council would get the biggest raise — to $138,315, a 23% boost to their current $112,500 pay, but only if they agree to give up extra payments known as “lulus” and outside income.

The mayor’s salary should be boosted to $258,750, from $225,000 now, the commission said — a 15% hike.

Mayor de Blasio has said he won’t accept a raise during his current term, but might if he’s reelected.

No, they don't deserve a raise

From City Journal:

...what do city council members do to justify the six-figure salaries they already enjoy? Their jobs, after all, are meant to be part-time. By law, the city council must meet twice each month, except during July and August. At these 20 “stated meetings,” votes are held and bills are introduced. After winning the speakership, Mark-Viverito promised to run the meetings efficiently, and indeed she starts them on time and typically adjourns them within 90 minutes or so. Almost every council member—except for the handful of Republicans and the speaker’s political enemies—gets assigned chairmanship of a committee, which usually meets once a month.

Council members serve on a number of these committees and are expected to attend committee hearings. They routinely show up just long enough to be marked “present” or to ask a question that could get them on the evening news. Each council member has a district office and a staff to deal with constituent services, media inquiries, and legislative matters. Council members keep themselves busy by attending events at senior centers or schools, meeting with local businesspeople, breakfasting with civic groups, and talking to other elected officials. To outsiders—whether employed in the public or private sector—it seems that council members make good money for doing what amounts to schmoozing for a living.

And the schmoozing comes with perks. Committee chairs are granted an additional “lulu” (payment in lieu of expenses) of $8,000 to compensate for time spent overseeing one committee hearing per month. The council’s majority leader, a position with no specific duties, gets a $15,000 lulu. The speaker gets an extra $25,000.

Advocates for the pay raise, in what they tout as a reformist measure, pledge to forego outside income and give up their lulus for the higher salaries. Earning outside income through a professional practice or a business, they suggest, is an inherently corrupting influence on the honorable execution of the “people’s business.” But the offer to go “full-time” in exchange for more money is just a bluff. Virtually no council members are capable of earning outside income, because few of them have any nongovernmental work experience. One-third of the 51 council members have zero significant prior work experience, except as aides to elected officials—frequently the council member whose seat they now occupy. Another six council members are former public school teachers. Several, including speaker Mark-Viverito, were union staffers or community organizers. Aside from a handful of lawyers who could possibly maintain private practices and an evangelical minister who continues to preach every Sunday, it’s hard to imagine that many members of the New York city council have much earning potential in the real world.

They want how much of a raise?

From the Daily News:

Poverty-crying City Council members are quietly plotting for a massive pay raise that will bring their six-figure salaries up to a whopping $192,500 — a 71% windfall — as cops face a proposed 1% hike, and firefighters will only see a 2.5% bump this year, sources told the Daily News.

More than half a dozen Council members — who earn base pay of $112,500 — have been holding hush-hush meetings to try to engineer the huge raises, which would bring their salaries above those of the governor and members of Congress, multiple Council sources said.

The members are hoping they can make the eye-popping raises more palatable to the public by agreeing to a slew of ethics reforms, which they hope will convince good government groups to back their plan, the sources said.

DAs want more money

From the Daily News:

The city’s district attorneys are looking for a fat raise.

The five DAs penned a letter asking that their pay be hiked to $250,000 a year — up from the $190,000 they make now, a 32% bump.

The prosecutors made the plea in a letter to the commission formed by City Hall to consider pay raises for elected officials, playing up their high-level duties.

"We are responsible for the prosecution of the most serious and violent criminal offenses including murders, rapes, robberies, gang violence, child abuse and domestic violence. We conduct long term investigations into sophisticated white-collar crimes, official misconduct and corruption, gun and drug trafficking and other offenses," they wrote to the Quadrennial Advisory Commission.

They went on to complain that their six-figure salaries pale in comparison to those of senior partners at private law firms, who earn millions.

De Blasio scrambles to get lawmakers raises while city workers starving

Angelo Torres lives in his car.  Photo by Geoffrey Croft

From the NY Post:

But even if you wonder how someone can hit rock bottom while raking in a salary, however small, plus enviable fringe benefits, paid vacations, sick pay, the chance to earn overtime pay and a retirement pension, consider this: De Blasio, man of the people, is moving heaven and earth to boost the bottom lines of himself and his closest political allies.

In keeping with his penchant for creating new layers of government bureaucracy to find solutions for questionable problems, de Blasio announced this month that he has formed a three-member advisory commission to determine whether all city officials who are elected deserve to get the potentially fat pay raises they’ve been denied for the last eight years.

I’m not crying for city brass. The 51 members of the useless City Council each earns $112,500 annually, plus “lulus” — most get stipends between $5,000 and $20,000 annually for heading committees and subcommittees. Public Advocate Letitia James rakes in $165,000 a year, essentially for finding ways to make cops miserable. And does anyone know what the five borough presidents do to justify their $160,000-apiece annual pay?

And then there’s the mayor.

He gets paid $225,000 a year and lives rent-free with his family in Gracie Mansion, where a 12-person staff cooks, cleans and tends the yard, plus cops are on call to drive him around. (De Blasio’s spokesman said he’d decline a pay hike now, but the mayor opened the door to sharing in the wealth if he’s re-elected in 2017.)

But where is the committee to determine whether peons like [park worker Angelo] Torres deserve monstrous pay hikes?

DC 37 locals represent a total of 121,000 workers, and some full-timers earn as little as $24,000 a year.

Schneiderman unveils anti-corruption plan

From the Daily News:

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman proposed an ethics reform agenda Monday to address what he called “a golden age of graft” among legislators.

Schneiderman called for barring lawmakers from making outside income, saying measures to force greater disclosure don’t go far enough.

Instead, Schneiderman would raise the current $79,500 base pay for lawmakers to between the $112,500 paid to New York City Council members and the $174,000 those in Congress receive.

He’d also do away with the flat $172 daily travel expense state lawmakers are paid. Instead, lawmakers would be reimbursed for expenses they actually incurred.

Hoping to stop “non-stop re-election fund-raising and campaigning,” Schneiderman pushed to change the state Constitution to make legislative terms four years, instead of the current two.

He’s also calling for campaign finance reform that would include the public financing of campaigns, “dramatically reduced” contribution limits and closing of loopholes that allow some donors to give basically unlimited amounts.

$79,500 for part time work is not enough

From the Daily News:

With the elections now over, lawmakers are hoping for their first pay raise since 1999.

“It’s long overdue,” said state Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn), who hasn’t had a raise since taking office in 2003. “You want responsible leadership in Albany, you need to be able to pay them responsibly.”

By law, a sitting Legislature cannot give itself a raise, meaning action to hike the current $79,500 annual lawmaker base pay would have to be taken by the end of the year or the issue will be shelved for at least another two years.

A source close to Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said the powerful Manhattan Democrat has long supported a legislative pay raise, noting many lawmakers have no other income.

But while not definitively ruling out a pay raise this year, the Silver source and an aide to Senate GOP Leader Dean Skelos said there have been no high-level talks on the issue.

Others, however, say that could change quickly, especially if the Legislature returns to Albany before January to take up some other issues, which is possible.

He went where the money was

From the NY Post:

A month after state Sen. Malcolm Smith bolted the Democratic Party to join the Independent Democratic Conference, seven of his staffers have gotten raises as high as 27 percent.

The extra staff cash in the Queens Dem’s budget is a reward for his defection, an Albany insider told The Post.

Smith and the four other breakaway Dems in the IDC made it possible for Republican Dean Skelos — who doles out staff budgets — to remain as Senate majority leader.

Here comes the property tax hike!

From the NY Post:

The City Council would have to raise property taxes to fund retroactive pay increases for municipal workers — and that’s going to happen, Mayor Bloomberg said yesterday.

The mayor was reacting to a report by the Independent Budget Office that said the next mayor could be facing a tab of more than $5.4 billion if unsettled union contracts are negotiated after Bloomberg leaves and include retroactive pay hikes.