Longtime NYS Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver Surrenders to FBI

NYS Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver has been an Albany fixture for 2+ decades. He was Speaker back when I was working in the legislature. And he's survived and thrived despite multiple scandals. But this is one scandal too far.

New York state assembly speaker surrenders to FBI http://t.co/pHWUMbR2jg

— TIME.com (@TIME) January 22, 2015

The Manhattan Democrat, who is the longest running Speaker in state history, is being charged with corruption over payments from one law firm (he is of counsel with another firm too).

I've been saying for years that the legislature should stop being a part time gig; they pay full time wages ($79,500, plus perks on position). Yet, they allow members to work elsewhere - like law firms, and can serve up conflicts of interest in no time. Eliminate the outside work, and you eliminate a major source of conflicts of interest.

Silver has stood against those reforms for years, in part because he benefited from the status quo arrangement. According to the NYT:

While it is legal for lawmakers to hold outside jobs, investigators said Mr. Silver failed to list the payments from the firm, Goldberg & Iryami, on his annual financial disclosure filings with the state.

In the past, Mr. Silver has been criticized for his outside law practice, a lucrative career that supplements the $121,000 he earns as speaker.

In 2013, Mr. Silver earned at least $650,000 in legal income, including work for the personal injury law firm, Weitz & Luxenberg, according to his most recent financial disclosure filing.

But what he does to earn that income has long been a mystery in Albany, and Mr. Silver has refused to provide details about his work.

He also managed to survive threats to his speakership when there were multiple sexual harassment/sexual assault cases that his office bungled/fumbled/buried. These include the Michael Boxley matter (who was one of his top staffers), investigations into whether other Assembly members engaged in sexual harassment or inappropriate conduct, including Micah Kellner, Vito Lopez, and secret settlements to silence the scandals. Silver admits that he shouldn't have used public money to fund the Lopez settlement.

The Assembly has paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars in settlements over these and other sexual harassment cases involving members and staffers. That doesn't count the boatload of money spent on legal fees.

Silver's actions in those cases should have been grounds for his caucus to send him packing, but he used divide and conquer to split the caucus from picking a replacement.

But he couldn't outrun federal prosecutor Preet Bharara. He's managed to do more to roll up corruption in Albany than Gov. Cuomo's defanged Moreland Commission. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I suspect there's lots more to come.

Gov. Cuomo Sets Course For Reelection Campaign With Tax Cut Gambit

Gov. Andrew Cuomo is hoping to win over some voters upstate with a plan that would cut somewhere from $2 to $3 billion in New York State taxes and fees.

In a surprising announcement scheduled for Wednesday morning, Cuomo will appoint former Gov. George Pataki and former Democratic state Controller Carl McCall to head a task force charged with finding ways to cut between $2 billion and $3 billion in taxes next year, a source with ties to McCall said Tuesday night.

Cuomo wants to announce an aggressive tax-cutting plan as he heads into his reelection run next year.

On the face, this makes perfect sense. New York has a reputation as a high tax state, but when you look under the hood, the tax cuts would do New Yorkers a tremendous disservice. There are several high profile projects around the state that are in dire need of funding, and some or all of the money to be cut would go a long way to funding those projects.

I'm talking about critical infrastructure improvements.

In New York City alone, there's Phase 2 of the Second Avenue Subway that needs to be funded so that the East Side of Manhattan commuters get relief beyond a stub line. Throw in bridge repairs and infrastructure improvements in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, and there's a pretty long list.

Then, there's Gov. Cuomo's pet project - the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement. It's waiting on confirmation of a federal loan program to fund the project, and the state has already borrowed nearly a billion dollars to get the project off the ground.

Upstate infrastructure needs significant investments, including sewer and water treatment facility upgrades, road rebuilding, and bridge repair or replacement.

Instead of cutting these revenue sources altogether, redirect some or all to fund infrastructure projects that will help modernize the state's crumbling infrastructure and to protect its residents from the effects from tropical storms and hurricanes.

Stunted

Over the weekend, five of the Democratic party candidates for NYC Mayor spent the night in public housing in Harlem at the request of Al Sharpton. They included Christine Quinn, Bill DelBlasio, Anthony Weiner, Bill Thomspon, and John Liu.

Democratic candidates Christine Quinn, Anthony Weiner, Bill de Blasio, William Thompson Jr. and John Liu spend 12 hours with a host family at the Lincoln Center Houses, located on East 135th Street Between 5th Avenue and Lennox Avenue.

The candidates slept on sofas, air mattresses and sleeping bags in the apartments, some of which were without air conditioning on one of the hottest days of the year.

On Sunday, Christine Quinn discussed the conditions of the apartment she spent the night with the NY Post.

“The apartment I stayed in had a bathroom that was covered with black mold,” said City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. “It was the worst I’ve ever seen. When the city of New York is the landlord, this is unacceptable.”

Quinn was one of five Democratic candidates for mayor who accepted a challenge from the Rev. Al Sharpton to spend a night in a public-housing complex.

The candidates say they wanted to highlight condition in city-run public housing. About 3,100 residents live in the East Harlem project.

All emerged from the overnight stay with claims that all would fight to improve the conditions.

I'm sorry, but I can't believe any of them when they say that they would work to improve conditions.

You see, all of them have been in a position to not only understand the conditions, but to actually fix them.

Christine Quinn is the current Speaker of the New York City Council. As such, she can hold hearings, address budgetary concerns, and demand changes at the New York City Housing Authority which oversees public housing in the City.

Bill Thomspon and John Liu are the former and current City Comptroller, respectively. As such, both could investigate the Housing Authority for mismanagement of city resources, failures to enact reforms on spending, and demand changes in how the Housing Authority operates.

Then, there's Bill DelBlasio, who's the City Advocate. In that position, he's able to gather and collect complaint data about public housing and demand change.

Finally, there's former Congressman Anthony Weiner who could have addressed the matter while in Congress and sought more funding or reforms in the Housing Authority to get local politicians to demand improvements and change.

All five share the failed opportunities to fix the Housing Authority and poor housing conditions while they were in their current positions. Now that all five are seeking the mayorality, they are willing to say or do anything to get the votes of those living in the projects.

None are deserving.

All failed to do what needed to be done when they had the chance to act, but since votes are on the line, all are speaking out about the deplorable conditions. Anyone who spent any time in these projects would have known this - anyone who spoke or responded to constituent letters would have heard the horror stories.

What we had was a photo op that will be quickly forgotten once the votes are counted. That's not how it should be, but there it is.

New York's SAFE Act Needs Fine Tuning

Despite the swift bipartisan action in New York to amend the state's firearms laws to address high capacity ammunition holders, types of illegal firearms, and providing mental health services and exclusions from firearms ownership as well as periodic licensing for lawful owners, the state legislature did goof on one aspect of the law.

As written, it would appear to make firearms owned and operated by law enforcement and even military forces in New York illegal and subject to criminal penalties.

A troubling oversight has been found within New York State's sweeping new gun laws.

The ban on having high-capacity magazines, as it's written, would also include law enforcement officers.

Magazines with more than seven rounds will be illegal under the new law when that part takes effect in March.

As the statute is currently written, it does not exempt law enforcement officers.
Nearly every law enforcement agency in the state carries hand guns that have a 15 round capacity.

A spokesman for the governor's office called Eyewitness News to say, "We are still working out some details of the law and the exemption will be included, currently no police officer is in violation."

The Patrolman's Benevolent Association President released a statement saying, "The PBA is actively working to enact changes to this law that will provide the appropriate exemptions from the law for active and retired law enforcement officers."

This isn't a fatal defect though, as the state law already has exemptions in place for law enforcement on several fronts, and the New York State Penal Code is not to be strictly construed. The proposed changes will clarify things, but the NYS Penal Code also has rules of construction that would have carved out a law enforcement exemption by application:

S 5.00 Penal law not strictly construed.
The general rule that a penal statute is to be strictly construed does
not apply to this chapter, but the provisions herein must be construed
according to the fair import of their terms to promote justice and
effect the objects of the law.

In other words, a court could have construed the application of the limitations as not applying to law enforcement but only to criminals.

Then, there's specific exemptions:

S 265.20 Exemptions.
a. Sections 265.01, 265.02, 265.03, 265.04, 265.05, 265.10, 265.11,
265.12, 265.13, 265.15 and 270.05 shall not apply to:
1. Possession of any of the weapons, instruments, appliances or
substances specified in sections 265.01, 265.02, 265.03, 265.04, 265.05
and 270.05 by the following:
(a) Persons in the military service of the state of New York when duly
authorized by regulations issued by the adjutant general to possess the
same.
(b) Police officers as defined in subdivision thirty-four of section
1.20 of the criminal procedure law.
(c) Peace officers as defined by section 2.10 of the criminal
procedure law.
(d) Persons in the military or other service of the United States, in
pursuit of official duty or when duly authorized by federal law,
regulation or order to possess the same.

Seeing that 265.01 is the base charge (misdemeanor) and exemption applies to law enforcement, one could extrapolate that it too applies to the other more serious charges - since the penal code isn't to be strictly construed.

The correct thing would have been to specifically amend NYS Penal §265.20 to include the references to the ammo amendments and other newly created felony counts. That's probably what the amendments will offer up.

Further, there are calls to amend the state's laws to address privacy issues of owners.

Here's a FAQ on how the new law applies to existing firearms, owners, and various registration and licensing requirements.

New York Set To Adopt Stronger Gun and Mental Health Regulations: UPDATE: Gov. Cuomo Signing Tonight

The NYS State Senate passed their gun control/mental health comprehensive bill yesterday, and the Assembly is set to pass it today. Gov. Cuomo will probably sign before the end of the week (there's a 3-day waiting period unless a message of necessity is attached).

So, what does the bill include? The bill summary holds the key.

Ammunition limits:
The bill will cap magazine/clip size at 10 - anything more is illegal regardless of date of manufacture. Going forward, max clip/magazine size is 7. A mechanism is going to be put in place to identify high volume purchasers of ammo and these buyers will have to be run through the NICS database. The bill requires that any seller--whether located in New York or out of state-ship the ammunition to a dealer within New York for in-person
pick-up.

Licensing:
While the existing law granted non-expiring licenses, the new law will require relicensing every five years. Failure to recertify means revocation of the license.

Kendra's Law:
Well, it extends Kendra's Law through 2017 (granting judges the authority to issue orders that require people who meet certain criteria to regularly undergo psychiatric treatment and that failure to comply could result in commitment for up to 72 hours - such persons are not forced to take meds though).

Gun sales/transfers:
Background checks must be completed for all gun sales, except for immediate family. Private sellers may transfer a gun only if the buyer has obtained a federal "NICS" check. Further, dealers must maintain records of private sale background checks, and private sellers may charge a fee of up to $10 on a transaction. Transfers between immediate family members will be exempt from the requirements of this section.

Storage:
For persons who live with those who are not allowed to own firearms, there's a new requirement for the lawful owner to safely secure those weapons (gun lock/safe).

Mental health:

Persons who are mentally ill and dangerous cannot retain or obtain a firearm. First, mental health records that are currently sent to NIDCS for a federal background check will also be housed in a New York State database. The law will require mental health professionals, in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment, to report if an individual they are treating is likely to engage in conduct that will cause serious harm to him- or herself or others. A good faith decision about whether to report will not be a basis for any criminal or civil liability. When a Section 9.46 report is made, the Division of Criminal Justice Services will determine whether the person possesses a firearms license and, if so, will notify the appropriate local licensing official, who must suspend the license. The person's firearms will then be removed.

Criminal penalties:
Criminal penalties are added or increased across a range of crimes, including straw purchases, increased penalties for firearms on school buses and school properties.

School safety:
The state will increase reimbursement to school districts seeking building safety upgrades (think bullet resistant glass, secured entry areas, etc.)

Most of these changes are reasonable, though there's reason to expect the NRA or others to challenge the mental health provisions, particularly when someone who is declared mentally incompetent to possess firearms has to have those firearms seized by local law enforcement. The NRA might also challenge the ammunition hold (clip/magazine) limits, but that's likely to pass Constitutional muster.

One of the reasons that these provisions passed the State Senate so easily is that these are really common-sense enhancements to existing law and eliminates loopholes in the existing law. It also addresses the mental health law and need to strengthen criminal penalties for straw purchases.

Upon passage, this will be among the strongest gun regulations in the nation, and it could also form the basis for provisions that the Obama Administration might take up to deal with the issue on a national basis.

UPDATE:
Gov. Cuomo will be signing the SAFE act into law at a signing event in the Capitol Building at 4:45PM in Albany. It is the first major legislation taken up by any legislature in the country in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre and represents a significant tightening of registration and ownership rules for firearms. It will not be without controversy.

The Harassment Scandal That Threatens To Take Down NYS Democratic Leadership

Over the past couple of weeks, a growing scandal in the New York State Assembly has meant that Assemblyman Vito Lopez lost his chairmanship of the powerful Housing Committee over revelations that he harassed multiple women over a period of years. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver stripped Lopez of his chairmanship, but then it was revealed that Silver authorized the payment of a $100k settlement to two women over additional harassment claims.

Then, there's word that NYS Attorney General Eric Schneiderman signed off on the settlements, which used taxpayer funds, despite claims that Schneiderman's office had not given Speaker Silver guidance.

Speaker Silver admits that he and his office screwed up the handling of Lopez's case.

We have a couple of interrelated issues: (1) the criminal/civil liabilities of Lopez for carrying out harassment in his office, which included suggesting to female staffers that they ought to wear more revealing clothes or go braless; (2) Speaker Silver's handling of the cases and not making the issues public; (3) AG Schneiderman's handling of the case from his office.

It's an issue that threatens to overshadow the convention this week. Censure isn't enough, and a more thorough house cleaning needs to occur, including the Speaker himself:

Mr. Silver announced on Aug. 24 that he was censuring Mr. Lopez, 71, after a bipartisan Assembly ethics committee found credible evidence that Mr. Lopez had groped, kissed and verbally harassed two female employees. Mr. Lopez was also stripped of his chairmanship of the Assembly’s housing committee.

Over the next few days, reports emerged that Mr. Silver had signed off on a $135,000 secret settlement of claims against Mr. Lopez brought by two other women, and that the previous claims were not referred to the Assembly’s ethics committee. Mr. Lopez subsequently said he would not seek another term as chairman of the Brooklyn Democratic Party but has refused calls to resign his Assembly seat.

“The only time I ever had a conversation with him was about 10 minutes before I issued the letter stripping him of his chairmanship, and then I had a subsequent conversation with him last week and I asked him to resign,” Mr. Silver said. “He obviously didn’t agree with me, but he didn’t say much. He just indicated that he couldn’t — that he wasn’t going to.”

In statements last week, Mr. Silver, the Legislature’s most powerful Democrat, acknowledged mistakes in his handling of the alleged harassment incidents.

“Ultimately, I’m the speaker and I’m responsible, and clearly mistakes were made,” he said on Monday.

Mr. Silver said he first heard about claims made against Mr. Lopez in January. The first two women who brought claims were represented by a team of lawyers that included Gloria Allred, the prominent Los Angeles attorney. They initially sought $1.2 million.

Mr. Silver said his legal staff acted in good faith, explaining that they were trying to avoid costly litigation and to accede to the wishes of the alleged victims.

“What was demanded was tremendously more than what the case was ultimately settled for,” he said, “and the judgment of settling the case was that we will save the state money on potential liabilities here, in addition to the fact that the assemblyman agreed to pay a sum for his own actions.”

Trying to settle the matter makes sense since the costs of litigation could have been far higher, but the failure to refer the matter to the ethics committee was a massive failure on the Speaker's part.

To have the AG lie and obfuscate about his role in signing off on the deal is unforgivable.

This is hardly the first time that Silver has come under fire for botching the handling of harassment or sex abuse in the Assembly; his own staffer was convicted of sexual assault and his office attempted to cover up the details.

For far too long, the state legislature has operated under the Bear Mountain Compact, which is an unwritten rule that what happens in Albany stays in Albany. It created a permissive attitude where legislators can act as they please and ethics and the law were meant for everyone else, but optional for those who enact the law.

Two separate investigations are underway: one by the state’s Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE) and another by the Staten Island district attorney who is filling in for the recused Brooklyn prosecutor. Among those allegedly harassed is current NYC City Councilwoman Diana Reyna, who was one of Lopez's staffers.

The JCOPE is hamstrung by the fact that Silver gets to appoint some of its members, and they can limit their investigation rather than going after all the malfeasance involved - meaning that Silver could skate by on his own handling of the growing scandal.

The sad thing is that Silver will win reelection handily (and retain his speakership) and so too will Lopez. While Lopez said that he would not seek reelection past this November, he's going to win handily. Far too many constituents ignore massive problems with the candidates they elect - including criminal behavior. For the legislature to clean up its act, voters have to demand changes. Legislators aren't going to do it to themselves.

Silver's called for Lopez to resign, though Lopez has rebuffed the call thus far. Some Democrats are calling for Lopez to resign immediately, including New York Senator Chuck Schumer (who originally hails from Brooklyn). Those calls need to come hard and fast, and the Assembly Democrats ought to be considering a new speaker but Silver's lasted as long as he has as speaker because he's the consummate professional politicial - dividing and conquering potential alternatives to his speaker's position.

Tappan Zee Bridge Replacement Gains Key Approval

Despite concerns that the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council was violating state law, or at least stretching the notice requirements so as to allow a vote on the Tappan Zee replacement project without giving proper notice, the Council did hold its emergency meeting today.

Backed by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, the Council unanimously approved the project, even though there's still no concrete design and the final costs are still not known.

The 9:30 meeting was streamed from the state Department of Transportation website, but had no audio during the 40-minute program, which included public comments from Riverkeeper and Tri-State Transportation Campaign and a presentation by the board.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a steadfast advocate of a new Tappan Zee, is expected to comment on the milestone vote at a news conference in Piermont at 1 p.m., his office said.

The unanimous vote in favor of the $5.2 billion project was expected, after the county executives from Westchester, Rockland, and Punam announced last week they supported the governor’s plan to replace the Tappan Zee. To ensure the state could compete for federal funds for the project, today’s meeting was quickly organized on Friday afternoon.

That drew sharp criticism from major interest groups which argued that a last-minute notice prevented the public from getting involved.

Veronica Vanterpool, executive director of Tri-State Transportation Campaign, attended Monday’s vote and questioned whether the project will be able to secure federal funds. Last week, a state comptroller report blasted the Thruway Authority for poorly managed finances. The Thruway Authority owns and operates the Tappan Zee.

“In order for this to be a competitive project, there are a lot of red flags raised, by the comptroller and by the credit agencies,” Vanterpool said. “That needs to be addressed. You want it to be the best project so it will receive federal funds. How can it be the best project if the finances are so shaky?”

Even the county officials in Rockland and Westchester are left with only assurances that mass transit (whether bus rapid transit or commuter rail) will eventually be included in an I-87/I-287 corridor project to come after the bridge is built with capacity to handle eventual construction.

We'll probably get our first crack at viewing the bridge designs once the winning bids are announced next month.

Still, the biggest question is how the bridge construction will be funded. Approximately $2 billion will be paid for via a federal loan. The remainder will be funded from user tolls. The last couple of weeks have seen the Governor's office release a toll structure that would nearly triple tolls, but then Governor Cuomo admitted that the tolls seem to be high.

He's trying to play the tolls both ways. On the one hand, his office put out those numbers knowing what it would take to cover the construction and debt costs. By their reckoning, those tolls are needed to fund the construction if the state is incapable or unwilling to pony up the money directly so as to cover the debt costs and construction costs directly. On the other hand, the Governor can claim that he's now concerned that the numbers would produce such high tolls and he'd look into it.

However, that could mean that the transit options get shelved indefinitely, even though they have the potential to take the largest number of vehicles off the road and reduce congestion throughout the I-87/I-287 corridor. That, however, is a direct competitor to the Thruway Authority's need to stimulate tolls that generate revenues for the Authority to fund both capital projects and operating expenses.

One of the rationales for hiking the tolls to their stratospheric levels is that it would match the George Washington Bridge's new tolling. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense since the Port Authority's come under fire itself for hiking tolls when the perception that the money isn't going to fund transportation infrastructure but rather World Trade Center work. Mind you that the gap in the Port Authority's budget is due almost entirely to the cost overruns associated with the PATH transit hub at the WTC - $1.2 billion in overruns nearly matches the money expected to be realized from the toll hikes.

What gets lost in all this is why infrastructure projects costs as much as they do when compared to European or Japanese projects of similar scope. There's no reason they should cost as much, and yet project after project has seen overruns and cost estimates that boggle the mind.

Recapping the New York Primaries

Once again, the incumbents in New York managed to hold the day. But before I tackle the Charles Rangel v. Adriano Espaillat race, there's a few other races of note to run through.

Statewide, there was but one race. It was for the GOP nomination to run against Kristen Gillibrand for the US Senate. Wendy Long, a New York City lawyer, handily defeated Rep. Bob Turner and Nassau County Controller Robert Maragos. Turner, one might recall, won the seat vacated by Anthony Weiner. Long will face an uphill battle against Gillibrand, who has a massive war chest available to her. New Yorkers deserve to get at least a competitive race to press Gillibrand on issues ranging from 9/11 first responder compensation, funding for transportation and infrastructure, and economic development upstate.

Grace Meng won the race for NY6 over Rory Lancman, a seat that was vacated by the retirement of Rep. Gary Ackerman.

In one of the most watched races, Charles Barron was handily defeated by Hakeem Jeffries for the NY8 House seat. It wasn't even close, but that's not stopping Barron from demanding a recount.

Guess Barron wasn't satisfied with losing, he wants to double down on the moonbattery.

He thinks he "won" because nearly every politician and their mother in the NYC and NYS Democratic party essentially came out to campaign for Jeffries. Barron thinks he accomplished something by getting Gov. Andrew Cuomo to robo call for Jeffries. Others backing Jeffries included former city Comptroller Bill Thompson, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, and Council Speaker Christine Quinn, whose staffers worked on Jeffries’ behalf.

The thing is that they all understood that Barron wasn't a suitable candidate for Congress (or dog catcher) and wanted to make sure he didn't get a chance. Even though the UFT chose to stay out of the race and DC-37 came out in support of Barron because Barron opposes charter schools, the turnout didn't favor Barron and Jeffries got the job done.

Now, as for Rangel v. Espaillat. It was supposed to be much closer than the final tally. In fact, many were predicting that Espaillat would win because of the changed demographics of the district due to redistricting. Yet, Rangel showed once again that his get-out-the-vote machine can deliver on election day. He's managed to hang on to win 45% to 40%.

Despite being censured by Congress and a litany of tax and ethics violations that should have sent him packing from Congress (and he lost his chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee), Rangel continues to be sent back to Washington by the voters.

Rangel will serve as long as he's willing or healthy to do so. Nothing will stop him, not even scandals that would have laid low many other politicians.

Indeed, he continues to garner the support of New York politicians, ranging from Ed Koch to Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Mike Bloomberg.

Come November, Rangel is all but expected to win the seat he has already held for 21 consecutive terms. For many in Harlem, he's the only Congressional representative they have known.

The Rebuilding of Ground Zero, Part 165

There's been little movement on the resumption of construction of the National 9/11 Museum, despite a visit from President Obama last week and the principal politicians and bureaucrats involved in the museum and memorial process all present at the same time.

New York and New Jersey Governors Andrew Cuomo and Chris Christie have called on the National Park Service to get involved in the memorial and museum endeavor, but both Governors ignore that they hold key roles in the redevelopment and rebuilding process. They're the ones to whom the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey answers. If the governors had wanted to get the process restarted and completed, they could have forced the Port Authority to cut a deal with the memorial and museum foundation.

Instead, we're seeing nothing but delaying tactics from the Port Authority and shifting and denying blame for the delays.

And the New York Post is reporting that Governor Cuomo appears to have it in for Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who holds a key position in the memorial foundation - a personal spat is blocking redevelopment:

Gov. Cuomo is so angry about his dad being dissed by Mayor Bloomberg, he’s holding funding for the 9/11 Museum hostage until a new mayor is elected, sources told The Post.

Officials close to Cuomo said it all became personal because of how his father — former Gov. Mario Cuomo — was treated by the mayor’s people at Ground Zero ceremonies last Sept. 11.

The elder Cuomo was first hassled about 6:45 a.m. that Sunday as he tried to clear security and get into the perimeter of the World Trade Center site.

A short time later, he was again blocked — that time as he tried to access the 9/11 memorial. That confrontation was defused only when a PA official intervened,
One of the governor’s top aides, Joe Percoco, was also hassled by city staffers at the event, even though he was in the governor’s entourage.

Events that day only added insult to injury for the governor.

He was already enraged over the way he felt City Hall tried to minimize his role in planning the ceremonies. He was also angry at being assigned a reading from Franklin Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” speech, because it had been read at a previous 9/11 event by former Gov. George Pataki.

“Mario didn’t want to cause a scene [on 9/11] so he was quiet about it, but it was certainly raised internally. Everybody has heard about it,” a source involved in the city-state museum talks told The Post.

A source close to the mayor said Bloomberg’s feeling about the governor’s reaction is that “on the chart of crazy, it’s off the charts.”

I'm not quite sure how much we can read into this, but personal politics has driven the redevelopment of the World Trade Center off the rails from the outset. It was Gov. Pataki's decision to pick Daniel Libeskind's master plan despite better designs offered up by the likes of Sir Norman Foster (who had experience doing major projects of the size and scope).

That led, in turn, to all kinds of problems with Libeskind's skyscraper designs that led to choosing other architects to design and build the towers that are rising around the site. Libeskind may have his name on the master plan, but his name isn't associated with any of the tower designs. All that added up to years of extra delays and higher rebuilding costs.

And the personal politics continues - with personality conflicts likely playing a role in bringing construction of the museum to a standstill.

I've argued for some time now that the NPS should have been involved from the get-go and that they are uniquely qualified to tell the story of 9/11, the 1993 WTC bombing, and the history of the site. The memorial foundation may have raised hundreds of millions of dollars for that purpose, but they're still short on how to fund ongoing operations once the museum is open. That's a huge concern going forward because the museum is not only meant to teach current generations about what happened at the World Trade Center, but to inform future generations.

It should not be subject to entry fees to learn about this critical era of American and world history.

UPDATE:
Governor Cuomo's office calls the NY Post story 100% absolutely false. However, the issue of control over the site is the real reason work has come to a standstill:

Bloomberg and the governors disagree on who should foot the costs—Bloomberg wants the Port Authority to continue paying, but the governors reportedly "contend the PA is willing to pay its share but won’t write a blank check that could amount to hundreds of millions down the road. The governors also insist that the PA maintain day-to-day control over the entire WTC site. The 9/11 Museum is operated by a private foundation chaired by the mayor." One Port Authority official told the Post, "This whole fight is Cuomo and Bloomberg. And it’s about which one of them is going to control the legacy of 9/11."

There's no reason that the Port Authority should maintain day-to-day control; they've botched nearly every aspect of rebuilding - from the planning and design to the containment of costs and missed deadlines at every opportunity. Much of the work above ground has proceeded despite the efforts of the Port Authority - not because of the agency.

So, while Cuomo and Christie are calling on the National Park Service to get involved, they aren't pushing the Port Authority to do what is within its power to do - namely finish the rebuilding process in a timely and cost-effective manner. That's on them - not the memorial foundation or anyone else.

Pedro Espada Found Guilty On Multiple Fraud and Theft Counts

After spending the better part of two weeks deliberating without a verdict and various reports indicating that there was a possibility of a hung jury, the jury came back with a verdict on four of the counts against ex-Democrat ex-State Senator Pedro Espada Jr.

The jury found him guilty of theft and fraud relating to charges incurred by Soundview Healthcare Network, a charitable health care entity that Espada founded and operated for decades:

He faces 10 years in prison for every guilty count.

The jury, after delivering those four "guilty" findings, then resumed deliberating on the remaining four criminal counts against Espada — and the eight remaining counts against his son, Pedro Gautier Espada, who is accused in the same scheme.

The Espadas are accused of looting more than $500,000 from Soundview Healthcare Network by having the federally supported non-profit pay for personal expenses ranging from Puerto Rican vacations to sushi dinners to family birthday parties.

Those expenses were allegedly falsely claimed to be related to legitimate business purposes for Soundview, which is supposed to help poor Bronx residents get quality health care.

Three of today's theft convictions of Espada relate to swindling that occurred from 2005 to 2007, while the fourth conviction was for a combined theft and fraud charge. The convictions mean that Espada faces the potential of at least 40 years behind bars, regardless of the outcome of further deliberations.

The jury had been deadlocked over whether they could find Espada guilty separate from the acts of his son, Pedro G. Espada. They apparently came to a resolution on the father's acts on a number of the allegations, and may well find his son guilty of the same charges.

Espada has been in the news before. He had previously been part of an attempt to shift political control in the State Senate (the coup) when he and fellow Democrat Hiram Monserrate defected to the GOP to try and gain more power for themselves, and has been at odds with Gov. Andrew Cuomo (who initiated the investigation into Soundview while Cuomo was the state's Attorney General).

It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Carl Kruger Enters Plea Deal On Corruption Charges; Will Serve 9-11 Years In Prison

Former State Senator Carl Kruger from Brooklyn has entered a guilty plea in a wide ranging corruption case that will lead him to serve 9-11 years in prison. The Brooklyn Democrat was caught

Kruger and his close friend, Michael Turano, signed plea agreements this afternoon in federal court — Kruger pleaded guilty to four counts and Turano to one. Kruger admitted to performing official favors for clients of lobbyist Richard Lipsky in exchange for cash payments that were funneled through entities controlled by Turano.

According to the agreement, Kruger faces the prison time as well as restitution of between $15,000 and $150,000 for his crimes. He and Turano each agreed to forfeit $450,000 of their ill-gotten gains.

The charges include wire and mail fraud and bribery.

Kruger, Carl and Turano, Michael - Plea Agreements

Kruger was indicted earlier this year, along with Turano and Assemblyman William F. Boyland Jr stemming from dealings with hospital officials and Boyland was accused of having a no-show job. Boyland Jr. was acquitted in a trial last month. Another defendant, David P. Rosen, the former chief executive of the health care organization, MediSys, was convicted in September of conspiring to bribe Mr. Boyland.

Details Emerging About Proposed Tappan Zee Bridge Replacement

Since the Federal government pushed to expedite the Tappan Zee bridge replacement, details have been limited as to what the bridge will look like and what kind of accommodations for mass transit will be included.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHA), which is behind the project, set the budget at $5.2 billion and the bridge will actually be two separate spans north of the current span. The termination points on either shore of the Hudson will be the same but the bridge will take a new alignment. Each new span will have four 12-foot wide lanes plus a full sized shoulder for emergency service/breakdowns. The current span lacks a breakdown lane, which means that any disabled vehicles results in massive traffic jams during rush hour or peak travel times.

To arrive at $5.2 billion, mass transit is not being included. That means no rail connections or bus rapid transit, although federal planners say that the bridge design could include structures designed to allow rail or bus rapid transit to be built at a later date.

The existing span is overcrowded and deteriorating after 56 years of use. Earlier this month, the Obama administration helped jump-start replacement plans for the Tappan Zee Bridge, declaring it eligible for fast-tracked federal approvals.

However, one aspect of the proposal will not be going forward, at least not yet. The mass transit aspects of the new bridge were dropped, which helped trim the cost to $5.2 billion from as much as $21 billion. The document only talks of future mass transit.

Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino thinks that leaving mass transit off the current design is short-sighted. "I am troubled by the proposed design's absence of a mass transit component that would help alleviate congestion," he said. "A new bridge — without a mass transit component — would already be at capacity on the day of its opening."

The plan calls for two separate four-lane spans, separated by a 42-foot gap — which is where a future mass transit component could be included. It would be built just north of the current bridge

The scoping document supersedes all the work done to date on a design that would incorporate mass transit in some form in a Rockland-Westchester transit corridor upgrade that would run to nearly $30 billion if fully built. The bridge component including mass transit was likely to run to $10 billion.

The main criticisms levied at the new expedited proposal is that it provides for no mass transit when the bridge is completed and the promise of building mass transit at a later date is cold comfort for those who have to make the trip at present. I am generally in agreement that mass transit needs to be included in some form, but I don't think heavy commuter rail is needed. The MTA might want to expand its service and connect its east of Hudson and West of Hudson service areas across the replacement bridge, but it has had limited ridership on its existing service (and a significant portion of the Port Jervis branch remains largely out of service due to Irene).

Second Avenue Sagas thinks that the state and federal government are making a mistake by killing the mass transit portion along the lines of the ARC tunnel cancellation by Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey. In fact, they think that it's an even bigger mistake.

In a way, then, this decision is worse than New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s move to cancel the ARC Tunnel. There, he simply let the status quo stand. Here, Cuomo and the Feds are on the verge of funding something that will move transit-oriented progress backward in time. Even if the state or D.C. eventually found the money to add transit to the middle of the bridge, a wider roadway already in use won’t move the region forward.
It’s not too late for the Tappan Zee. The public comment period on the scoping document will last another three weeks, and already the public is making its voice heard. Yet, government officials say they had no choice. The money, they say, simply wasn’t there. Yet, New York could probably get away with tearing down the Tappan Zee and building nothing if they spent the $5.2 billion on improving rail service. That’s the 800 pound gorilla in the room.

They can't tear down the bridge, which is a critical component of the NYS Thruway and is a vital north/south connector through New York and a major hub for east-west traffic that seeks to avoid congestion through New York City.

Bus rapid transit makes far more sense since it requires less infrastructure to accomplish and could set the stage for rail to supplant rapid transit in the future. I don't think commuter rail component for the corridor is truly viable when better options would be for the expansion of the Spring Valley line into Rockland that take commuters into NY Penn/Hoboken via Secaucus. It's far more cost-effective than trying to build a completely new route with the hope of building the connectors at a later date. The MTA can barely complete repairs to the Port Jervis line, so where is it coming up with the funds to provide service across the bridge?

At the same time, it shows that the federal govenrment is unresponsive to the needs for mass transit and is unwilling to pay for it; it refused to take on the potential and likely cost overruns on the ARC tunnel that New Jersey taxpayers would have had to endure despite this being an interstate project. The federal DOT refused to budge on backstopping New Jersey on the cost overruns, so Christie killed the project before taxpayers took a huge hit; and the replacement Gateway tunnel proposal is better aligned for high speed rail, NJ Transit gets and cost overruns will be backstopped by the feds rather than New Jersey or New York taxpayers solely.

The feds are looking to spread money around as much as possible, and that means that they aren't funding projects that are truly deserving - such as incorporating the mass transit into the bridge design. Yet, there is a solution here within New York's grasp.

It means having the state pony up the difference to make sure that the federal portion gets utilized while incorporating the transit segment. That will take political capital from Albany and Gov. Cuomo doesn't appear willing to put that kind of money aside for mass transit. Neither is Westchester or Rockland capable of putting up money necessary for transit improvements through their respective counties.

Higher tolls along the NYS Thruway were going to be part of the state's bridge replacement plan, but that should still be incorporated in the project to make sure it gets built with a full-incorporated and built transit component.

Details Leaked About Port Authority Toll and Fare Hikes

The MTA has already announced its intention to raise fares and tolls on its bridges and subways and buses.

Now, the Port Authority is proposing to unleash its own two-tier hikes on tolls and PATH fares.

A $4 toll increase for E-ZPass users could go into effect as soon as September on the three major Hudson River crossings – the George Washington Bridge and the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels – as well as three other bridges between New Jersey and Staten Island, the Bayonne and Goethals Bridges and the Outerbridge Crossing.

The proposal, the first increase since 2008 and only the third since 2001, would raise peak-hour E-ZPass tolls on those crossings to $12 a ride, up from $8. The individuals familiar with the plans asked to remain anonymous because the proposal was not yet intended to be made public.

The biggest increase by far would be felt by drivers who pay in cash: cash tolls on those crossings would be raised by $7, to $15 a trip. (By comparison, a cash toll on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge currently costs $13.) About 25 percent of drivers on the Port Authority crossings currently pay in cash.

A single fare on the PATH train, the diminutive commuter subway system that connects parts of Manhattan to New Jersey, would be raised by $1, to $2.75 a ride.

And the price of a 30-day unlimited pass for the PATH system would be raised by 65 percent, to $89 from $54 a month.

The tolls would be raised by another $2 in 2014. No increase in PATH fares would occur at that time.

These hikes will be felt hardest by those living on Staten Island, who have no way to travel by car without getting hit with tolls - you can leave Staten Island without paying a toll, but you'd get hit with a $13 to $15 toll for coming back.

Fare hikes will be a further drag on suggesting that people get out of cars to use mass transit.

I'm among those who would be hit by the fare hike - $89 from $54 a month. That's $35 a month or $420 per year (a not inconsiderable amount). Many people use PATH to commute between Newark, Jersey City, and Hoboken, so they'd be hit by the bi-state agency's plans. Combining the fare hikes with the cost for NJ Transit, and some commuters may decide that it is cheaper and less of a hassle to drive into Manhattan than use mass transit.

I understand that the Port Authority needs to close its budget due to cost overruns on various Ground Zero components, but some of those problems were self-inflicted. It refused to engage in serious cost-cutting to make sure that the PATH transit hub was built within budget. It's also facing higher energy costs to operate PATH, but the system has gone from having one of the oldest fleets to having one of the newest after its purchase of hundreds of new railcars. There are savings to be had by retiring the old cars as well.

At the same time, the Port Authority should start to see income coming in from Ground Zero as the Freedom Tower nears completion along with Tower 4 and the transit hub. It recently completed a deal with Westfield for the retail component, leading to more revenues. Those revenues can't come fast enough.

It's expected that the first phase of the increases would raise $720 million annually. The second phase would add another $290 million annually.

At the same time, the Port Authority's expenses would begin to decline as construction wraps up at Ground Zero and it can focus on other area projects that are on its to-do list including a Bayonne Bridge lift/replacement, a replacement span for the Goethals Bridge, and maintenance on its bridges, tunnels, and airports.

If this deal is approved by the Port Authority Board, Gov. Christie and Gov. Cuomo each have 10 days to veto the plan.

Gay Marriage Opponents In New York File Suit Claiming State Violated Law In Debating Measure

New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedom, which filed suit in state court, claims that the State Senate violated the Open Meetings Law while debating same-sex marriage, is going to find a real tough case ahead of it. They've seriously misread the state law on point, a law that was enacted specifically because Fred Dicker of the New York Post argued for access more than 25 years ago.

Freeman explained that the Open Meetings Law had, from its original passage, an exemption for “deliberations of political committees, conferences and caucuses.” But this was unclear: courts ruled that it should be interpreted to apply narrowly to matters of party business, Freeman said. In Albany, a young New York Post reporter named Fred Dicker wrote a letter to Assembly Speaker Stanley Fink, a Democrat, requesting access to the Democratic party conferences that occurred on a near-daily basis when the legislature was in session.

“I even signed an affidavit,” Dicker told me by phone. “After we told them we were going to sue them, they wrote an exemption.”

Indeed, as Freeman noted, the law was amended to add a second section, giving explicit, blanket authority for legislative conferences in Albany and around the state “to discuss anything including a matter of public business, notwithstanding the member of staff or guests.”

The suit doesn't seek to overturn the outcome - that gays have the right to marry in the state, but claim that the State Legislature didn't follow state law in limiting debate and other procedural acts.

The problem is that the suit seriously misreads state law and is baseless.

Democrats Choose Mark Weprin To Run For Weiner's Vacated Seat

New York City Democrats have chosen former state assemblyman Mark Weprin to run for the seat vacated by disgraced Congressman Anthony Weiner.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced there would be a special election earlier this month and there has been much speculation over who would run.

Weprin is heavily favored to win the seat, which covers parts of Brooklyn and Queens.

A former New York City councilman, Weprin ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination to be comptroller in 2009.

He was elected to the Assembly in 2010 after serving in the City Council for eight years.

Weprin is the son of former Assembly Speaker Saul Weprin (who took over that position when then Speaker Mel Miller was convicted on mail fraud charges).

So, there is a certain amount of symmetry to this decision.

How the New York Marriage Equality Act Got Done

It was backroom deals and rules changes in the State Senate that were brokered by Gov. Andrew Cuomo with legislative leaders and proponents that helped ensure passage of the Marriage Equality Act granting gays the right to marry.

The rules changes helped make sure that the vote passage would occur in time for the 11PM newscasts. It could have backfired in a major way though - as some Democrats who had backed the bill were not able to explain their votes due to time constraints.

Essentially the Senate rules were changed in a backroom agreement before session started and then changed again during the vote to make sure it would be concluded to make the 11 p.m. newscasts.

Sen. Kevin Parker, a long time proponent of same-sex marriage was informed by Senate staff that he would not be able to explain his vote. He was livid. He cursed out the governor and eventually stormed to the podium where Duffy was presiding–a number of other Democratic senators followed him–seemingly to calm him down.

Earlier when Sen. Ruben Diaz tried to lay the marriage bill aside he was ignored. Normal senate procedure allows for any senator to lay a bill aside for debate. It gives legislators a chance to debate the bill then when they vote, they again have the chance to explain their vote. But the rules weren’t the same.

Parker told the Gazette that around 7 or 8 p.m. the Senate Democratic conference met and discussed a deal. “We were informed of he procedure,” said Parker. “Everyone knew Rev. Diaz was going to lay the bill aside but we agreed not to debate the bill after he laid it aside. We would call the role and all be able to explain our votes. We would be given two minutes each.” The Gazette and a number of other sources reported the proposed limited debate even earlier in the week. I was told to expect it by multiple senators earlier yesterday morning.

But that deal is not what happened. Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s aide Steve Cohen was on the floor trying to hurry everything along. Parker says that Cohen was trying to, “shut down debate. The cover story was that Dean [Skelos] was upset at Ruben Diaz’s remarks about Republicans and was going to pull the bill if we started speaking. Everyone knows we don’t control Diaz.”

Parker says he was upset most of all because as a minority legislator he has little power. Explaining his vote on issues is at times his only resort. Parker says his district is full of populations who do not support gay marriage and although he was a long time supporter he felt it was important– just as it was for other Senators who were allowed to speak –to explain the thinking behind his vote. Parker was not the only angry Democrat. A number of other legislators were visibly distraught when they were informed they would not be able to speak.

Here's why Cuomo gets credit for the gay marriage bill; he knew how to take advantage of the lay of the land and worked out a deal with Republican strategists and fundraisers to help Republican State Senators who would be amenable to a deal on the gay marriage bill. From the ">New York Times:

But the donors in the room — the billionaire Paul Singer, whose son is gay, joined by the hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Daniel Loeb — had the influence and the money to insulate nervous senators from conservative backlash if they supported the marriage measure. And they were inclined to see the issue as one of personal freedom, consistent with their more libertarian views.

Within days, the wealthy Republicans sent back word: They were on board. Each of them cut six-figure checks to the lobbying campaign that eventually totaled more than $1 million.

Steve Cohen, the No. 2 in Mr. Cuomo’s office and a participant in the meeting, began to see a path to victory, telling a colleague, “This might actually happen.”

The story of how same-sex marriage became legal in New York is about shifting public sentiment and individual lawmakers moved by emotional appeals from gay couples who wish to be wed.

But, behind the scenes, it was really about a Republican Party reckoning with a profoundly changing power dynamic, where Wall Street donors and gay-rights advocates demonstrated more might and muscle than a Roman Catholic hierarchy and an ineffective opposition.

And it was about a Democratic governor, himself a Catholic, who used the force of his personality and relentlessly strategic mind to persuade conflicted lawmakers to take a historic leap.

“I can help you,” Mr. Cuomo assured them in dozens of telephone calls and meetings, at times pledging to deploy his record-high popularity across the state to protect them in their districts. “I am more of an asset than the vote will be a liability.”

Over the last several weeks, dozens of lawmakers, strategists and advocates described the closed-door meetings and tactical decisions that led to approval of same-sex marriage in New York, about two years after it was rejected by the Legislature. This account is based on those interviews, most of which were granted on the condition of anonymity to describe conversations that were intended to be confidential.

It's little wonder then that Cuomo was hailed as a conquering hero during this weekend's Gay Pride Parade in New York City; that popularity will translate into votes in November and those who had opposed the gay marriage bill are finding themselves on the wrong side of history in the state.

Despite some claims that they will attempt to get a ballot measure to overturn the Marriage Equality Act by adding a constitutional amendment stating that marriage is between a man and woman, such actions are futile. New York will not turn its back on gay marriage and other states will follow in New York's footsteps.

If they don't, as New Jersey's Gov. Chris Christie has indicated (but New Jersey previously adopted a civil union arrangement several years ago), New York will likely see the lion's share of gay marriages as people from the tristate region will flock to New York to get married - and take advantage of the benefits that the new law confers on spouses.

New York Prepares For Operation of Gay Marriage

Governor Andrew Cuomo signing the Marriage Equality Act into law was only the first step towards bringing gay marriage to fruition in New York. Now, the judiciary and bureaucracy throughout the state has to revise forms, set up procedures, and adjust for what is expected to be a mad dash for the altar for many long time committed gay couples who have been waiting years for the opportunity to get married.

Gays will be able to get legally married beginning July 24, 2011. In anticipation of that date, the judiciary is making additional judges available to preside over ceremonies.

Roughly 45,000 gay couples live in New York State, according to census estimates. No exact projection is available for how many will marry here, but officials are readying for thousands, especially in the first week.

“We are training our staff to be prepared for a very large number of people on the first day,” said Michael McSweeney, the New York City clerk, who oversees the marriage bureau. “We are going to be part of history.”

The city has struck an agreement to increase the number of state judges available to perform same-sex marriages. Their workload could swell; John Feinblatt, a top adviser to the mayor, said judges could be bombarded by requests to circumvent the 24-hour waiting period.

Over the next 30 days, state officials must also rewrite the marriage license application form and distribute it to the hundreds of city and town clerks. In Oneonta, a college town of about 14,000 people in central New York, the city clerk, James R. Koury, was expecting a surge in applications, especially on the first day.

“I think we’re probably going to have people coming that day, and I’m looking forward to it,” Mr. Koury said.

The marriage bill was approved in the State Senate late Friday night by a vote of 33 to 29. Four Republicans joined all but one Democrat in supporting the measure after a lengthy and often-heated campaign.

The state’s political establishment is watching closely to see what kind of backlash those four Republicans will face. Already, the National Organization for Marriage, an advocacy group, is pledging to raise $2 million in a bid to defeat them.

New York is now the sixth and largest state to permit same-sex marriage, joining Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont, along with the District of Columbia.

After the passage of the legislation, the governor declared that New York had resumed its role as a “beacon for social justice.” Mr. Cuomo, the prime mover of the bill, is expected to march in the city’s gay pride parade on Sunday, which will likely be an emotional and overflowing gathering. His past appearance at the parade was attacked by his Republican opponent, Carl P. Paladino, during the campaign for governor last year. Mr. Paladino criticized Mr. Cuomo for taking his teenage daughter to march alongside him.

The governor is certain to be a major attraction this year in the procession, which sweeps down Fifth Avenue and across Greenwich Village. Attendance is typically 1.5 million; this year, organizers expect an additional 500,000 to 1 million people.

Those expected to take advantage of legalized gay marriage in New York include high profile Hollywood stars like Neil Patrick Harris.

Wedding vendors are hoping for a windfall as couples prepare for the big day.

Most importantly, the gay marriage bill will affect benefits rights, hospital visitation rights, and rights of survivorship in estates and financial transactions.

New York State Senate Passing Marriage Equality Act: UPDATE: Passed 33-29

The political maneuverings are over and the State Senate finally appears to be on the cusp of passing the Marriage Equality Act. It appears that the measure has sufficient votes to pass after Republican Stephen Saland said he would vote to approve the measure. (Watch it as it happens).

Watch live streaming video from nysenate at livestream.com

If the vote goes as expected, it would appear that the vote will be 36-26 in favor of the bill that would legalize gay marriage and provide protections from liability for religious groups that object to gay marriage. 32 votes are necessary for passage.

The Senate took up the measure just before 10 p.m., and the Senate galleries were packed with gay couples in support of the bill and religious opponents of it.

Senator Stephen Saland, a Poughkeepsie Republican, became the critical 32nd vote, telling his colleagues in an emotional address that he believed the issue came down to a question of equality.

“I know my vote is a vote of conscience,” he told a hushed chamber. “I am at peace with my vote. It was a struggle. It was an extraordinary deliberation.”

The measure was to be the final act of this year’s legislative session, and lawmakers earlier Friday barrelled through a variety of votes on university tuition, rent stabilization, and property taxes.

“After many hours of deliberation and discussion over the past several weeks among the members, it has been decided that same-sex marriage legislation will be brought to the full Senate for an up or down vote,” the majority leader, Senator Dean G. Skelos of Long Island, said in a statement. “As I have said many times, this is a very difficult issue and it will be a vote of conscience for every member of the Senate.”

Mr. Skelos, whose caucus had been criticized over the last week for not scheduling a Senate vote on the same-sex marriage measure, said in an interview, “The days of just bottling up things, and using these as excuses not to have votes — as far as I’m concerned as leader, it’s over with.”

The marriage measure, which was proposed by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and approved by the state Assembly, has been publicly endorsed by 31 of the 62 senators — leaving the measure one vote shy of the votes needed for passage in the Senate. The announced supporters include 29 of the 30 Senate Democrats and 2 of the 32 Senate Republicans. Supporters and opponents alike said that anything could happen when the Senate takes its vote.

So, while there are some Republican faithful who are threatening to vote Republicans who approve this measure out of office, Republican leadership sees that as the lesser of evils as denying this measure would likely cost them control over the State Senate.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo has already expressed his intention to sign this bill into law.

UPDATE:
The bill passes 33-29, which means that the bill will now go on to Gov. Cuomo for his signature. It will make New York the sixth and largest state to enact gay marriage in the US.

Marriage Equality Act Will Pass In New York; IF It's Ever Brought To a Floor Vote

This is where things stand with the Marriage Equality Act (gay marriage) proposal in New York. Everyone recognizes that if the bill is brought to a floor vote in the State Senate, it would pass - and Gov. Andrew Cuomo would sign it into law, making New York the sixth (and by far the most important) state to do so.

The problem is that it's still mired in procedural actions and haggling over various terms, and it's stuck with other proposals including a property tax cap and mandate relief that the Legislature has yet to address. The Senate Republicans are caught between a rock and hard place:

As soon as today, the New York Senate’s majority party could decide whether to duck out of Albany without voting on same-sex marriage or risk allowing a vote.

If there’s a vote, all it would take is one more Republican to vote yes, and same-sex marriage will become legal — something sure to anger the GOP’s conservative wing and expose Republican senators to primary election challenges next year.

But walking away from the issue without a vote could prove the riskier political strategy as the nation waits to see whether New York becomes the sixth and largest state to sanction same-sex marriage.

Thursday, the Senate adjourned for the night at 11 p.m. without even talking about same-sex marriage. Senators will resume work today, but it remains unclear whether they will vote on the issue. Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos has not agreed to allow a vote.

The Senate's Republican majority is scheduled to meet behind closed doors at 10 a.m. today then go into open session.

But a backlog of other more ordinary yet important bills for New Yorkers must be dealt with first.

Once those bills are passed, the Senate Republicans could start what would likely be a lengthy debate over the gay marriage bill in a closed-door caucus. They could then send the bill to the floor, or kill it.

No vote would unleash a continual stream of questions and backlash from gay rights advocates, Democrats, and national and local media that could linger through campaigns in 2012, a presidential election year.

Avoiding the vote would fly in the face of a popular governor who has made gay marriage a core agenda item. The Republican senators could count on the same issue waiting for them in Albany next January, when the Legislature re-convenes.

“Whether it’s this year or next year, at some point it’ll go on the floor,” said Sen. John DeFrancisco, R-Syracuse, who opposes same-sex marriage but is open to allowing a vote.

Senators, especially those opposing same-sex marriage, get the conundrum. That explains why they are working to amend legislation they may ultimately vote against.

“I think the best case scenario for us is to have an up or down vote and move on to our core issues, jobs and taxes,” said Sen. Greg Ball, a Republican from Putnam County who has spent days working to insert more religious protections into a bill already passed last week by the Assembly.

If the Republicans, who control the Senate punt this year, it will come back at them with a vengeance next year during a Presidential election season, and their thin majority in the Senate could be at risk. That's why getting this off their plate makes sense as it would let them deal with other pressing issues, including mandate relief.

This should have been included in the "framework" agreement between the Legislature and Gov. Cuomo (aka 3 men in a room - Gov. Cuomo, Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, and Speaker Shelly Silver), but it wasn't. That was a mistake on Skelos' part although he has to keep his caucus in line on the other issues.

So, while the legislature could potentially end its session today, it has to deal with several important outstanding bills, including the gay marriage bill and we could be looking at a marathon session once again before the weekend. Either that, or the legislature will be back next week to pass what is still left on the calendar.

NY Faces Budget Mess; Awaiting Action on Same-Sex Marriage; But Finds Time To Name Official Mineral

Priorities people. It is all about the priorities.

The Legislature, which has rarely found itself in a position to adopt an on-time budget, rent control extensions, or act upon controversial legislation like the Marriage Equality Act, did find time to pass legislation that would name the Herkimer Diamond the official mineral of New York.

Herkimer diamonds are interesting minerals to be sure, but it's a footnote when compared to the more momentous legislation pending in the State Senate. The Marriage Equality Act would grant gays the right to marry in New York. Passage would make New York the sixth and largest state to adopt gay marriage rights.

That legislation is still pending as a framework has been agreed to on rent control and other important legislation like tuition hikes for SUNY, power plant siting, and a cap on property taxes.

The framework, which was agreed to yesterday means that we'll once again see all-nighters in Albany as the legislature rushes to adopt the package of bills before leaving town for the year.