[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. We'll start on local politics today because it is a very interesting time in both New York City and New York State affairs right now. A lot of it is Democrat versus Democrat. We've been covering on the show, the rejection by the Democratic State Senate of Governor Hochul's nominee for chief judge that took a decisive step yesterday as the full Senate voted down Hector LaSalle's nomination.

We've been covering the fracturing of the New York City Council Progressive Caucus, all Democrats, what was a veto-proof, 35-member caucus suddenly shrunk by about half last week over a split in the ranks over less police funding so there can be more for other kinds of public safety measures like housing, mental health services, and community violence preventers. We'll hopefully have another city council member on that on tomorrow's show on the other side from the council member we had on earlier in the week.

In a way, this is all healthy, right? Democracy means different groups of people who have different interests, elect different representatives, and those representatives hash things out in legislatures and in mostly one party in New York. That means Democrats will sometimes disagree on how progressive to be with other Democrats. The Progressive Caucus divide is coming to a head now because it's budget season in city council, so the debate about police funding versus other public safety programs is concrete and immediate, not an abstract debate.

It's also budget season in Albany. Yesterday was what they call Tin Cup Day up there when, typically, the mayor of New York and other mayors around the state come asking the governor and the state legislature for the funding they want for their top priorities. Sure enough, Mayor Adams was there yesterday and on several fronts playing defense over things the state might do that could cost the city big time. Here's the mayor in Albany on the governor's budget proposal for the MTA, which includes $500 million a year more from the city.

Mayor Eric Adams: This current proposal hits New Yorkers twice, once through the higher fares that riders will still face and once through diminished service delivery by local government, which will have at least $500 million each year going to subsidize a state-run authority.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, they used to say it's Cuomo's MTA. Remember that? Well, now, Eric Adams is saying it's Hochul's MTA. We'll talk about other Adams-in-Albany issues too, including charter schools, migrant services, bail reform, and more with the WNYC and Gothamist reporters whose beats intersect on all this. WNYC's Jon Campbell, who covers Albany, and WNYC's Elizabeth Kim, who covers the mayor. Good morning, Jon. Good morning, Liz. Welcome back to the show.

Jon Campbell: Good morning, Brian.

Elizabeth Kim: Good morning, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Jon, can you elaborate on the MTA funding issue that the clip there referred to? The MTA is in a funding crisis or is that overstating it?

Jon Campbell: I don't think that's overstating it. Essentially, the MTA has not recovered ridership from the pandemic. The pandemic and how we hybrid work and people not going into the office, that has fundamentally changed how people use the MTA and how often they use the MTA. You've seen a major dip in revenue for the MTA and they're facing budget deficits. It's supposed to be $2.5 billion in 2025.

The state comptroller has warned that it could get to $4 billion-plus in 2026. There's a lot of pressure on Albany in particular and New York City to act to help rescue the MTA essentially. Governor Hochul put out this multi-part plan to try to boost funding for the MTA away from fares. That includes $300 million from the state. That includes an $800 million increase in what's known as the payroll mobility tax, this tax on employers throughout the MTA region.

Where Mayor Adams is taking an issue, in particular, is it also includes $500 million from the city itself. The mayor says we can't afford that basically. The governor on the other hand says, "Well, this would go towards, say, paying for bus passes, subway passes for city school children. It would make sure that the city is covering that cost and that helps the city," et cetera, et cetera, but the mayor says, "Listen, we can't do it. We already subsidized the MTA through policing costs and things like that and we can't afford an extra $500 million."

Brian Lehrer: Well, Liz, is this request for the city to contribute, in this case, another $500 million a year, different in kind from what has been in the past? Obviously, yes, on paper, the MTA is a state function as the mayor says, but most of it exists to feed commuter rails into Manhattan and for New York City residents to get around on the buses and the subways within the city. Is something new in kind here or is it just a matter of patching these holes in the current budget problems?

Elizabeth Kim: Well, like you suggested, it does feel like déjà vu, right? We're constantly having this debate as to what is the city's responsibility towards the MTA if it's a state-run agency. I think what the mayor is underscoring in his argument is that not only does Hochul want the city to pay $500 million this year. She wants it in perpetuity. That was something that him, along with his budget director, made very clear at the hearing yesterday that this is, to them, a seismic new obligation for the city that will have a huge repercussion going forward. They're questioning whether that's fair.

Brian Lehrer: You wrote, Liz, that this issue represents a rare split between Adams and Hochul. What's their relationship been like generally and what are some big things they agree on?

Elizabeth Kim: Well, they've been key allies since the very beginning and it's a very smart alliance for the two of them. Both of them need one another. I think the top issue that they've been aligned on is policing. That was a key electoral issue. Together, they have done things like expand policing in the subways. On another issue that they're pretty aligned on is housing. Together, they have committed to add a substantial amount of new housing in New York over the next decade.

Brian Lehrer: Let's take an MTA-related call right off the bat. Listeners, you can call on any of these things as we talk to our Mayor Adams reporter and our Albany reporter, Liz Kim and Jon Campbell respectively, about the intersection of their beats. This week, as Mayor Adams was in Albany, Tin Cup in hand as they call it "Tin Cup Day," on this day every year in budget season when the mayors around the state, from around the state go to Albany and talk about their needs and jump up and down and say, "How dare you impose these costs in our cities," like with the MTA that we're talking about right now.

212-433-WNYC on any of these city and state issues, the MTA funding, also charter schools we'll get to. Criminal justice, Liz just brought up. We'll get to the State Senate versus the governor on the chief judge, all these Democrat versus Democrat issues in play right now in New York City, in New York State, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or tweet @Brian Lehrer. Before we bring up some others, let's take at least one call on the MTA piece of this. Stewart in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hey, Stewart, thanks for calling in.

Stewart: Thank you, Brian. I guess I'm really annoyed about them trying to gouge more money out of people who live here. I take the trains, the subways all the time, and the fare jumping now is epidemic. Usually, I often find myself the only person who's putting my MetroCard in. It's out of control. There's no enforcement. Then on top of that, they want to pass a congestion pricing proposal, which will just pick the pockets more of the average person who needs to go back and forth.

I don't know if you remember, but maybe a dozen years ago, there was a real exposé on the corruption in the MTA in The New York Times. I don't know what happened to that. It was a very in-depth discussion about keeping two sets of books. There's been no accountability in that department and we're the ones that will end up paying for it.

Brian Lehrer: Stewart, thank you for all of that. Let's talk about a few pieces of that. Jon, does the actual dollars-and-cents cost of fare beating come up in any of this reckoning of MTA finances from the governor's lips or the mayor's?

Jon Campbell: Well, we've certainly heard a lot of it from Janno Lieber, the head of the MTA. He talks about that quite a bit and how it is a significant financial issue for the MTA. It hasn't really come up so much in the context of the budget as much. The governor's budget, it does rely on the MTA finding $400 million in cost-saving measures essentially, but that doesn't include service reductions or anything like that. It does also include this 5.5% fare increase to $3 for a trip. It includes those things. It does not really get at the fare-jumping issue. Like I said, it is something that Janno Lieber highlights quite a bit when he speaks.

Brian Lehrer: How about that alleged double set of books? We heard something like that in a segment we did last week. I don't know if either of you heard it. With a Democratic member of Congress from New Jersey, Josh Gottheimer, and a Republican member of Congress from the northern suburbs, Mike Lawler, and what their bipartisan agreement was about is that the MTA is full of financial waste and they shouldn't be imposing congestion pricing on people who they say drive because they need to drive, those who drive into the city for work. Jon, is that a real thing, this double set of books that exposed a lot of waste?

Jon Campbell: I don't know specifically that issue there, but I do know that Republicans in Albany in particular are constantly pushing for a forensic audit of the MTA. A deep, deep look. Mike Lawler, the congressman that you just mentioned, he was a Republican member of the Assembly. He hails from Rockland County, which always calls themselves the stepchild of the MTA. They generally do not like how they've been treated by the MTA over the years. They feel like they are just put off to the side. This is a constant refrain that the Republicans in particular in Albany push that they need a really deep-dive audit of the MTA.

Now, that said, you also have progressive Democrats in the legislature. People like Zohran Mamdani in the Assembly, Mike J. Norris in the Senate, they're pushing their own MTA plan. They want to get to a place where you can have, say, free buses. They want to make some changes. They want to tax the rich more to fund the MTA. They don't like the idea of this payroll tax, which they say is regressive. There's a lot of different ideas about what to do with the MTA out there, but there has always constantly been a push in Albany to get a deeper look at their books.

Brian Lehrer: I see there's a lot of interest on the phones about these MTA issues. Before we go on to some of the other things that I mentioned that we're going to bring up from the news of yesterday, we're going to linger on this and take a few more phone calls. Liz, did you want to add something right there?

Elizabeth Kim: Yes, I wanted to say that yesterday at the hearing when the mayor was asked, "How exactly do you think we should come up with this funding then," the mayor, who has prided himself on fiscal responsibility, made that argument that he believes that the state should take as much harder look at the MTA's finances. He said, "Look at what I did. I made budget cuts. Perhaps, there is fat to trim in the MTA's budget." Budget experts have said that the MTA may need to look at labor concessions, for example.

Brian Lehrer: Jeffrey in Queens, you're on WNYC. Hi, Jeffrey.

Jeffrey: Yes, love your show. I told your screener a joke and it just said, "To raise the fare on the buses and the trains, do you think that's fare?"

Brian Lehrer: Ha ha ha. Did you also have a serious point?

Jeffrey: [laughs] I also have a serious point. I would love to know what you think is the chance of having free transportation and I wanted to mention-- Hello?

Brian Lehrer: Yes, go ahead.

Jeffrey: I wanted to mention that I travel the subway with a guitar and an amplifier. I have to swipe my card and they open the door for me so I can go through with my amplifier on a cart. I kid you not, I have 5, 10 people asking if I will just let them get through the door while it's open. I'm--

Brian Lehrer: Jeffrey, thank you very much.

Jeffrey: Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Our your joke, they take that terminology seriously, the Fair Fares program, which is the reduced fare for people of limited incomes. Peter in Washington Heights wants to expand on one piece, not the joke, of what Jeffrey said. Peter on WNYC, hello.

Peter: Hello, so my idea is you could fund the MTA, increase ridership, and kill fare jumping, turnstile jumping, all at the same time by offering free MetroCards for all New Yorkers, which would be funded by a tax on all New Yorkers. That would work out to far less per person than what people pay now being paid out of taxes by those who can afford it.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you. Liz, I guess it's a question of how far they can go and who it would fall on to fund the MTA without fares at all. You mentioned the idea that at least is being kicked around now to make the buses entirely free. Is that partly because there is just so much fare beating on the buses even more than in the subways, and also because the people who ride the buses tend to be lower-income New Yorkers?

Elizabeth Kim: I think that's a piece of it, but the bigger argument is the expression that the subway and buses are the lifeblood of New York City. This is key to our economic recovery and it's about both getting people to places to shop, but also to work. Because ridership on the subways in particular is down, I think that that's a provocative idea. What if we just made it free? What if we subsidized this? Because then in a sense, we are subsidizing our economy. We've already seen another city in Boston that has already made strides in making, I think, the buses free for some of their residents.

Brian Lehrer: On raising the fares to compensate for this hole in the budget, someone on Twitter points out, "The more the MTA fare goes up, the more people don't pay their fares." So many people don't pay. I don't know if that formula holds true one-to-one. Jon, since the MTA is officially a state function and you cover the state, do you know if anybody has costed out what it would actually take to make MTA fares, or maybe not the commuter rails but at least buses and subways within the city, universally free? What would they have to do in terms of taxing other people or tapping other sources of revenue to do that? Has anybody really costed it out to your knowledge?

Jon Campbell: Well, the people that I mentioned before, the progressives that actually were in Albany last week pushing their "fix the MTA plan" that includes free buses, they have some cost estimates. I don't have them off the top of my head right now, but they have a plan where they say they want to divert more of the internet sales tax to help pay for this. They want to, like I said, tax the rich and adjust capital gains and things like that that they claim would help do that. They want to phase it in over a period of years. There is a growing national push for this.

Liz mentioned Boston. Washington, DC, is going to offer free bus service. You're starting to see that buildup here and there throughout the country. Of course, there's going to be a push in New York City. If, say, the progressives are able to get that through, that would lead to more change throughout the country. It's something that I think some people view as pie in the sky. The progressive Democrats who held their press conference, their rally at the Capitol last week, they say it shouldn't be pie in the sky, it should be realistic, and that's what we should strive to do.

Brian Lehrer: Liz, can I ask you one tangential question on something you've covered? Then we're going to turn the page and go on to all the other Adams-in-Albany issues that came up yesterday. You reported on the mayor changing his tune apparently about city employees, municipal employees working remotely some of the time. He had insisted that everybody come back in person five days a week, very much unlike what's going on in much of the private sector in the kinds of jobs where people can work from home. Suddenly, he started talking about adapting to a hybrid workforce this week. What changed?

Elizabeth Kim: Well, it's a significant change. I was looking at the timeline. It was almost exactly one year ago where the mayor made the remark that New Yorkers need to get out of their pajamas and go to work. He became this prominent spokesperson for being in-person in the office. He explained that it's not just about yourself. You, the office worker, you're part of this broader ecosystem of little shops and restaurants that make up the business districts in New York City, so then--

Brian Lehrer: Including this MTA shortfall, right, because less commuting?

Elizabeth Kim: Exactly. This is all about the vitality of New York. Then he also made the argument that we work better when we're in-person because it's this cross-pollination that's going on. Those are arguments that other policy experts have also made in favor of returning to the office, but the bitter truth is that most people who work in offices were not there yet. There was one civic group. They did a survey and they found that roughly just a little over half of people they surveyed said that they were back in the office.

It's not a lot of people who are back in the office five days a week. Many companies who were surveyed said they don't really foresee that happening over the next year. The mayor has had to come to grips with this reality over time. Then the other thing that's happening is that city workers who he has not allowed to work hybrid schedules are clamoring to get the same option as the private sector. We're at a moment where there is a shortage of city workers.

They're also in the midst of bargaining a new contract. The mayor is feeling a lot of pressure right now. How does he motivate a city workforce that, by all accounts, is really feeling a lot of low morale over this issue? At the same time, the job market is still pretty strong and they have options. He wants to retain workers and he needs to attract workers at the same time. I think this was a necessary concession that the mayor had to make.

Brian Lehrer: All right, more sound bites of Adams in Albany yesterday on more issues, more of your calls, more of our reporters, Liz Kim, who covers the mayor, and Jon Campbell, who covers Albany right after this.

[music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we talk about Mayor Adams' trip to Albany yesterday. There's so much going on between the city and the state. We'll also touch on the dispute. All of these are within the Democratic Party in New York State between the governor and the State Senate on who the chief judge of New York should be and why that matters and to whom we'll touch on the debate within city council. The Progressive Caucus, as we've been discussing on the show, splintering over the issue of police funding versus other public safety funding.

Charter schools is another one. Let's do the charter schools issue right now with Liz Kim, our Mayor Adams reporter, and Jon Campbell, our Albany reporter. Another issue where they agree on the goals but not on the finances, charter schools, they both support allowing more of them to open in the city. Here, again, is the mayor from his news conference in Albany yesterday on charters that have been approved, but the schools don't exist yet. These are known by the endearing name "zombie charters."

Mayor Eric Adams: Yes, I clearly talked about what's called "zombie charters," that these charters that are open, sitting there. There's no reason we're not filling them. We already allocated those numbers. There's no reason we're not. That comes with a course and the state should assist in that course. That is what's important.

Brian Lehrer: Liz, can you explain more about what a zombie charter is and why it would cost the city money if it doesn't exist as a school?

Elizabeth Kim: Well, I'm not an expert on this, but I think it's exactly what it sounds like. It's a charter that has been approved, but it doesn't have a location yet. Also, because of the charter cap, it's not allowed to open. The mayor is basically saying that because Governor Hochul is proposing to lift this charter cap, which would then allow these charters to open, it would impose a cost on the city because the city has to help find a location for these charter schools. The city is also obligated to pay a per-student tuition reimbursement for these charters. He is estimating that it could cost as much as $1 billion if all of these schools actually do open.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, so it would be $1 billion there, $500 million a year for the MTA. He's up in Albany arguing about these things. A billion here, a billion there. Soon, you're talking real money. Jon, are charter schools a statewide issue for the governor or mostly a New York City issue?

Jon Campbell: Well, they're a statewide issue in the sense that they are authorized statewide. There's a cap of 460 charter schools statewide, but there's this smaller lower cap for New York City in particular. New York City is at that cap. There's 84 charters still available across the state, but you can't get those in New York City right now because New York City's already at its cap.

What the governor wants to do is remove that New York City cap that would make those 84 charters around the state that aren't being used available to New York City. In that sense, it's primarily a New York City issue in her budget, but the Statewide Teachers Association, quite frankly, they hate charter schools. They feel like it takes funding away from the more traditional public schools. They're fighting very, very hard against this. They are a very potent force in Albany.

Brian Lehrer: This though is one of those issues that can make people's heads explode in New York City almost no matter what side of the issue you're on and that is over, "Why does Albany get to decide how many public schools of a certain type New York City can have, or how many red-light speeding cameras New York City can have, or these other things where the city is a creature of the state?" Is this a Democrat-versus-Democrat issue in the state legislature, Jon? Why do people outside of New York City, which is where the charter school debate is really taking place as you say, why do they care one way or another?

Jon Campbell: The answer is yes, it is a Democrat-versus-Democrat issue, in that Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul wants to remove that New York City cap. Democrats, particularly more on the progressive side in the legislature, they very much want to keep it in place. They don't want to increase charters. In that sense, it is Democrat versus Democrat. You see John Liu. He's the Queens Democrat. He's a state senator who is really leading the fight against this. He's the chairman of the New York City schools committee in the Senate.

You're seeing quite a lot of pushback from New York City Democrats to this proposal. That said, Mayor Adams, when he spoke yesterday, he didn't oppose the idea of expanding charter schools. He said repeatedly that he wants to take good schools and good concepts and expand them if you can, but his argument was primarily money-based. Like Liz said, he said we need more money. There are a lot of different factors here, but yes, it is one of these Democrat-versus-Democrat issues as so many are in Albany now.

Brian Lehrer: Right.

Elizabeth Kim: I think it's interesting that Adams is trying to thread the needle on this and be an agnostic by saying, "I'm not in favor. It's not about public or charter for me. It's about a good school. That was his response yesterday. I'm in favor of good effective schools.

Brian Lehrer: On city-state, finance question, city versus state, state funding the city, city funding the state, Frances on the Upper West Side has a question. Frances, you're on WNYC. Hello. I think Frances is calling another talk show on her other line, I think. Frances, can you hear me? Hi there. I know we had you on hold for a while. Can you hear me? You're on the air.

Frances: I can hear you. Can you hear me?

Brian Lehrer: Yes, I can.

Frances: Okay, I just wanted to know how much money New York City gives to the state in tax money that we seem to be giving a lot more than we're getting back. Also, in addition to that, so many people are leaving the city, are moving out of the city, so we're also losing more money. How do we justify this?

Brian Lehrer: Right. Well, on people moving out of the city or moving into the city, it's kind of both, right? A lot of people move out of the city all the time, but the city's maybe biggest issue is having housing development keep up with the population growth in the city. I never like it when we land on a simplistic, "Oh, people are leaving New York," because probably more people are coming to New York than are leaving New York.

Jon, this is an argument that New York City residents and upstaters have all the time or when they stopped to think about it like, "Wait, are my city taxes going to fund people in the rest of the state because there's so much wealth in New York City?" Upstate, they might think, "Oh, that New York City with all its problems, why are we subsidizing them? We should secede," so which is it?

Jon Campbell: [chuckles] Well, the city does give a disproportionate share of tax revenue to the state. The securities industry alone, Wall Street, it's about 18% of state tax collections. That is a considerable chunk and that's primarily income tax. That's the state's biggest tax driver. Yes, that's true, but you can take it to the national level. New York State gives more to the federal government than it gets back in services, et cetera, et cetera.

You could just keep going on that too. Yes, that is generally true, but New York City is a behemoth. It is the economic driver of the entire state and, in some ways, the country. There's no doubt about that. That's why you hear some of that. You just reference the secession top. There are people who say, "Long Island should secede. Upstate New York should secede." Just economically tax-wise, it doesn't work because New York City is such a huge part of the entire state's tax base.

Brian Lehrer: Secession is another thing. Well, I don't want to get into it because we don't have time but that Albany controls back 30 years ago. We talked about this on the show recently in How 1993's Politics Affect the Politics of Today series. In 1993, the voters on Staten Island voted overwhelmingly to secede from the rest of the city, but they couldn't do it. Why? Because it was really up to the state. The state legislature didn't let them. There's a new Staten Island secession movement going on right now, but there's no reason to think that Albany would let them do it today any more than they did 30 years ago. Shelley in Manhattan has a state finances question. Shelley, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Shelley: Hello. I'm calling, Brian, to ask you, where did the money go from online betting? We keep hearing we have no money, we need more taxes. Those were huge tax revenue.

Brian Lehrer: Right. At the same time that we talk about this explosion of legal online betting in New York State in this last year or two since it became allowed much more than anybody expected. Jon, I'm going to go right back to you on this because it's a state issue. Do we have the numbers and are these dollars earmarked for certain things?

Jon Campbell: Yes, they're definitely numbers. I was looking at it just last week for the Super Bowl actually. Since the start of last year when mobile sports gambling was allowed, these gambling apps, they've handled nearly $18 billion in bets. Now, only a small portion of that goes back and the state gets about 51% cut of that. It's millions and millions of dollars that the state has taken in. It's been a revenue generator for the state. That money is primarily flagged for education costs, the same way the lottery is or the state's casino share.

That said, part of the governor's MTA plan in future years, we're in the process right now. The state is in the process right now of selecting three full-fledged casinos that will go in the New York City area. She wants to take a portion of that revenue when they're up and running a few years down the line and put that toward the MTA. Right now, primarily, the gambling money goes toward education. In future years, the governor does want to take some of those New York City casino-- some of the revenue that comes from that and put it toward the transit system.

Brian Lehrer: Liz, an interesting moment for the mayor in Albany yesterday came when he talked about bail reform. He wants more of a right for judges to use discretion in keeping people accused of crimes locked up than they have right now in cases where the judges see the person as an ongoing criminal threat. The mayor said yesterday that when he asked for that last year focusing specifically on bail, he made a mistake. Listen.

Mayor Eric Adams: I'm not going to make that mistake we made last year of just focusing on one aspect of it. There's more to it. Defense attorneys must get the funds they need. Prosecutors need the funds that they need. I believe that we should have some form of judiciary discretion. We need to put all these things together and we need to stop the feeders, the environment that cause crime in the first place. That's the approach I'm taking as I come up here to speak with my colleagues.

Brian Lehrer: Liz, that goes to the divide in the Progressive Caucus in city council who don't think-- those who are still in the Progressive Caucus don't think he's funding enough to fight what he just called the feeders of crime, but can you put that clip into the context of whether the different things on his list for Albany there might make some kind of package that includes judicial discretion more palatable to the legislature?

Elizabeth Kim: Yes, and this is a tactic that the mayor started taking around the time when the Reverend Al Sharpton convened a meeting with him and a lot of other Black lawmakers like the majority leader, Andrea Stewart-Cousins. I think Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie was at that meeting. It was about finding consensus among the city's Black electeds. I think out of that, the mayor said like he said in that comment yesterday is that he wants to focus not on bail but on criminal justice reform.

The approach he's taken is to talk about repeat offenders, and what can we do to address these people who in his eyes are cycling in and out of Rikers or just being stuck in the court system and not being moved along. He's trying to address it that way. I think that that is a more astute way of going at it because I think it might be harder for progressives to say when he's talking about the court system. These people who are in Rikers have been waiting for their cases to be heard. We need to fund more lawyers, more district attorneys.

I don't know how a lawmaker can say, "No, that's a bad idea," because, obviously, we want those cases for people to proceed, right? I think this is a very interesting tactic that the mayor is taking. If you look at his testimony yesterday, it was a sharp departure from what happened last year when there were a lot of sharp exchanges between him and progressive lawmakers over bail. Yesterday, it was relatively muted, the conversations about criminal justice. The mayor got, I thought, a pretty warm reception in Albany.

Brian Lehrer: Jon, might he get judicial discretion?

Jon Campbell: Well, the governor certainly wants it. She wouldn't call it judicial discretion. Essentially, she wants to take what's known as the least restrictive measure out of the bail law. That is in cases that are eligible for bail. There's a clause in the laws that says right now that a judge must set the least restrictive means to ensure somebody comes back to court. She wants to get rid of that to make sure that judges know that they have the discretion to consider, say, a history of gun violence in somebody's past or domestic violence or juvenile offenses, things like that.

The public defenders in particular hate that proposal because they say the least restrictive standard is really important from a constitutional rights standpoint and from ensuring that we're not using bail as a punitive measure but are using it as it's meant to be, which is to make sure that somebody comes back for their court date. It's going to be a heavy lift in the legislature, but the governor is pushing for it and the mayor is pushing for it. There is some juice behind it, so to speak.

Brian Lehrer: A lot going on in legislative season in New York City and in Albany right now. If you want to read more about the things we were just talking about, Jon Campbell has got great reporting on Gothamist from Albany. Liz Kim has great reporting from city hall on Gothamist. You can read their multiple articles on some of the things we were just discussing. Liz and Jon, thanks a lot for coming on.

Elizabeth Kim: Thank you, Brian.

Jon Campbell: Thank you.

 

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.