Crowded Races for City Council in Brooklyn

While most of the country thinks 2008 is THE BIG YEAR for elections, New York City knows the really, REALLY big year will be 2009. Term limits is forcing out many city council reps, and all those term limited reps are looking to mob the runs for mayor, Public Advocate, Comptroller, etc. Some may be eyeing the Congressional seats that might get freed up when Congressional reps run for the Senate seat Clinton will vacate if she wins the Presidency.

But there is another mob of candidates: those trying to replace those term limited City Council candidates.

To date I have met scattered candidates for various City Council seats, including Costa Constantinides (who is on the steering committee of the Democratic Lawyers Council working on voting rights and is running in Astoria, Queens...with the name to match the district) and Steve Behar (running in district 19 in Queens).

But to date I have yet to have the chance to review the whole field running for a seat.

Well, from the Brooklyn Papers, I get a glimpse of the two races closest to me: the race to replace my Councilman David Yassky, and the race to replace the charming advocate for developers Bill DeBlasio.

So far three candidates are running to replace David Yassky in the 33rd council district. You can see it as the District Leader vs. the Yassky candidate vs. the machine candidate.

Jo Anne Simon, is the female Democratic District Leader in the 52nd Assembly district. I know her primarily from the Independent Neighborhood Democrat club where I am on the board. She has been teamed up with male District Leader Alan Fleishman as the main district leaders to stand up to the boss of the Democratic Party in Brooklyn, Vito Lopez. This is generally considered a big plus in this district where voters tend to greatly dislike Vito Lopez because of his links to cronyism and alleged corruption, his endorsement of Republican Al D'Amato over local resident Chuck Schumer, his apparent sellout to devloper Bruce Ratner, and his endorsement of the unqualified and homophobic Noach Dear for a judicial polsition (Dear had never even practiced law). Alan Fleishman and Jo Anne Simon have been among the only Brooklyn district leaders to routinely oppose Vito Lopez. Jo Anne Simon considers herself a reform Democrat, has been working hard for Hillary Clinton's campaign, and has worked hard for people with disabilities. The Brooklyn Papers seem to favor her because she was the only candidate for this race to be included in their list of the top 80 people and things to watch in Brooklyn in 2008. So far she has raised the most money for this race. She has ties to the most active Democratic clubs in the district and, barring the entry of anyone else, is likely to get endorsements from both the Independent Neighborhood Democrats and Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats (just my prediction here) and might get the support of other reform clubs. Her buzzwords are likely to be experience (she has the most of the three running to date) and reform.

In the opposite corner from Jo Anne would be Stephen Levin. As the Chief of Staff for Vito Lopez, Mr. Levin certainly is the anti-reform candidate and would likely be unpopular in much of the district including the top voter turnout areas. He hasn't even started raising money yet, which means this Vito Lopez may have been caught slightly unprepared here, but wants to try a power play for this district. Still, Vito Lopez is very good at attracting tons and tons of developer money...no strings attached, I am sure... Levin is the youngest and most inexperienced of the three declared candidates for the 33rd, but he will get the full backing of the Vito Lopez machine which means money and GOTV efforts on primary day. I predict the buzzwords for Levin will be "affordable housing" (which in his case doesn't mean anything but support for developers who claim they will build affordable housing but affordable for who?) and "change." The latter will be the counter to the experience of the other two candidates. I predict Levin will focus on criticism of Yassky to get at Thies, and a claim that Simon is anti-development and anti-affordable housing, neither of which are true.

The third candidate is also young but has more experience than Levin. Evan Thies is on Community Board 1 and is the former chief of staff to Councilman David Yassky, so could claim the most relavent experience in the race and is likely to get Yassky's endorsement. Yassky was very popular in this district, but parts of the district may still be angry after the difficult NY-11 Congressional race where Yassky was seen as stepping on some toes. Still, much of the distict was happy with Yassky and might see Thies as the natural heir. He has raised less than Jo Anne Simon, but more than the zero raised by Levin. Thies will emphasize his connection with Yassky and will probably focus on some of the more glaring problems with Atlantic Yards without necessarily addressing fundamental issues.

This race will, as with much in Brooklyn, focus on who says what about development, who gets the NY Times endorsement, and who has what ties to the machine. My experience has been that Vito Lopez's name is a big negative in Park Slope and Brooklyn Heights, to major chunks of the district, and so this could work against Levin. This district went AGAINST the NY Times endorsement in the Surrogate Judge race last year to vote against Lopez's candidate. I found the most common question I was asked when people discussed that race was "who was Vito's candidate?" and they voted AGAINST his choice. That will be a factor.

That said, the NY Times endorsement will be a huge factor in the race since this is a NY Times reading district. But it is also a district that has grown to dislike the Bruce Ratner overdevelopment schemes that this city is plagued with, yet the NY Times tends to like overdevelopment. All candidates will talk about affordable housing. There is a real need for affordable housing, yet this has also become a code word for "I support Ratner." Ratner supporters have latched onto that term as their excuse for supporting Ratner even though Ratner has no record of creating affordable housing.

The three current candidates should all be good at raising money, so money may be a more limited factor than in most city council races. Remember that Yassky, when he first ran, won despite having less money than his opponent. The NY Times endorsement may be worth more in this district than mere cash, and mere cash may not be able to overcome the taint of a Vito Lopez connection (it didn't help Shawdya Simpson despite a NY Times endorsement).

The dynamics of the 33rd race will almost certainly change. This does not seem like a full field of candidates. There may be a minority candidate entering and I know there are some people who are not satisfied with any of the current three on development. Some have told me they want to see a bolder anti-Ratner candidate and don't think any of the current three will suffice. So that may bring in a fifth candidate.

The other race that the Brooklyn Papers covers is the 39th City Council race. Five candidates have declared here, though I have heard a rumor that it really will be six in the end. Now here I have to lay out a disclaimer: I know a good number of these candidates...and generally like them. I also already have a horse in the race who is both a friend and a political ally, so take whatever I say with this in mind.

Three of the candidates were featured in the Brooklyn Paper's top 80 things to watch in 2008. The candidate they ranked highest of those three was also my friend and horse in the race, Josh Skaller.

Josh Skaller is director of information technology and systems at Globalworks, a field director with Democracy for New York City, and current president of the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats (CBID). He thus comes with an existing grassroots backing. He also is one of only two candidates in the race who already has raised some money. Josh is a very smart and nice guy. I have seen him deal with difficult situations in the CBID civil war of about a year ago. He was one of the few people who was respected and liked by both warring factions. His strengths are his existing grassroots connections, his diplomacy and his widely recognized integrity. Very, very few people in Brooklyn politics can match Josh for integrity. He will be portrayed as inexperienced by his opponents, but this can also be billed as a plus: people sometimes like outsiders they can trust. Josh's main emphases seem to be education and sustainability within an urban environment. He also is among the strongest opponents of Ratner-style development and I guarantee that he will be completely free of developer money. Integrity, community, and education are the themes you will hear from Josh.

The Brooklyn Papers ranked Craig Hammerman next in line as someone to watch in this race. He is district manager of Community Board 6 and ran for City Council once before, in 2001. He came in last in a field of six that time. He also hasn't filed any fundraising numbers. I have met him at least once and found him quite nice and likeable. He had a tough time on Community Board 6 balancing the pro- and anti-Ratner interests. In general CB6 was anti-Ratner and was punished by Marty Markowitz for this. Craig had kept a moderate stance throughout and so survived Marty's purge. Some feel this makes him weak on this issue, but his role in CB6 was not to push his own opinion, so I believe he has a shot at stating his own position clearer than it may have been from his role on CB6. He has competition for CB6 support because there are two other CB6 candidates.

Brad Lander came in third for this race in the list of top 80 people to watch. He is also the other candidate, other than Josh, who already has fundraising numbers, and he comes in first in this. He is Director of Pratt Center for Community Development, was head the Fifth Avenue Committe, and is currently a member of Community Board 6.

The last two running are people I know from the Independent Neighborhood Democrats. I have to say that if IND and CBID split their endorsements, my wife and I might be stuck and one of us might have to resign from the board of the club we are on. But we'll see how that goes. It is interesting that the reform clubs are each running people.

Bob Zuckerman is Executive director of the Gowanus Canal Community Development Corporation and the Gowanus Canal Conservancy. I am told there is some dispute among Gowanus Canal preservation groups and Bob's group is seen by some as the less environmentally sensitive, more pro-development one. I cannot vouch for this. It is my impression that the Gowanus Canal Conservancy is pretty good, but I get this from Gowanus Canal Conservancy members. I have avoided being in the middle of that fight. Zuckerman also was a member of CB6, like Hammerman and Lander. He also was nominated to be the next president of the Independent Neighborhood Democrats. He was a past president of the Stonewall Democratic Club and is with Lambda Independent Democrats. Thus he is likely to get strong support from the GLBT community.

Gary Reilly is a member of Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association. He will try to capitalize on the fact that he is the only candidate who isn't from Park Slope, so he will try to position himself as the candidate for the rest of the district.

CB6 has three candidates running, CBID has one, the current president of CBID, and IND has two, one of whom will likely be the next president of IND. This looks to be, at least on the surface, as an entirely reform field. I know some who question the reform and/or progressive credentials of some of the candidates, but I do want to say that all 5 candidates are good folk. I have my horse in the race but I respect all of them so far. From what I hear there may well be one or two more candidates. The machine and the developers certainly won't ignore this race. So the question is, are they backing one of the currrent candidates (in which case look at that candidate's claim of being reform with a huge grain of salt) or will they throw their own candidate in the mix. I hear rumors of machine/developer ties with one or two of the current candidates, but I also hear of the possibility of a machine entrant in the wings.

mole333's picture

| |

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Gothanonymous Reader's picture

Brownstone-centric

Both these districts encompass significant non-brownstone turf, inclduing significant Hasidic communities. In the 33rd they will probably back Vito's candidate (and I'm not certain that Levin isn't merely a holding action). However, there is a chance the Hasidim will fragment; the war among the Satmar is very bitter. Further, Isaac Abraham has made much noise about running, and would likely attract a big Hasidic vote, whether or not he was backed by any faction. As to a minority candidate, that presupposes that there will be some sort of black/Latino unity, which seems unlikely--and without it, there is little shot of such a victory. Much of the Latino vote is organizationally tied to Vito; the black vote is fragmented and disbursed, and not without its own regular ties.

In the 39th Borough Park and Kensington are huge. In Borough Park the vote is virutally all Orthodox, in Kensington, they are the largest bloc. An Orthodox candidate is not impossible, but more likely, they will pick their liberal and he will win. That's largelyl the story of how DiBlasio won, despite Steve Banks' hardy efforts to build his own Orthodox base. Frankly, none of these candidates seems a likely choice for Borough Park, especially lander, who's published some writing on Jewish matters which is likely to be found highly offensive by the Hasids.

mole333's picture

Orthodox

The candidates themselves are Brownstone-centric! And this is one reason (among many) that more candidates are quite possible. After all, most people consider Jews a minority as well!

In the 33rd I think Vito's candidate is weak, whoever it is. True the Hasids have a strong presence, but I think the NYT reading, latte sipping brownstone vote will be the key. But don't get me wrong. I don't think anything is a given yet. If that bloc is split between Jo Anne and Thies, other blocs become much more important...and the Hasids are another strong voting bloc, united or divided.

As things stand, in the 39th I think we can assume Bob Zuckerman won't get Orthodox support given their views on homosexuality. Beyond that you probably know more than I. I agree that on the surface the current bunch doesn't seem to have a candidate the Hasids can get behind...but I suspect some are doing some schmoozing that could help.

Gothanonymous Reader's picture

Schmoozing alone won't do it

I'm not sure any of these guys have a clue about Hasids, or even a clue about how to get a clue; ironically, Zuckerman probably come the closest to potentially having a clue--he has friends with friends. His gay identity would undoubtedly be a liability, but could be overcome. When Fred Richmond's activities with underage boys came out, the Hasids grumbled loudly, but they largely stuck with him. Of course he was a multi-millionaire with a charitable foundation and a track record in the community.

Still they would certainly prefer him to Lander, this quote is well circulated on the web:

"Anti-Zionist Jews have introduced other rituals as well, such as taking an oath against exercising their rights under the Law of Return—the privilege of citizenship in Israel that every Jew (except one who has a criminal past and might endanger the public welfare) currently enjoys. “Far from being protected by Israel, I feel exposed to danger by the actions of the Israeli state,” writes Melanie Kaye/Kantrowitz. “I am declaring another way to be Jewish.... I renounce my right to return” (p. 256). At the ritual circumcision of their son, Meg Barnett and Brad Lander issued a similar declaration: “We are thrilled to pronounce you a Jew without the Right of Return. Your name contains our deep hope that you will explore and celebrate your Jewish identity without confusing it with nationalism” (p. 293)."

Ironically, most Hasids in the 39th (where their are few Zionist-Lubavich), are non or even anti-Zionist, but they believe that politicians who are less than zealous in supporting Israel (whre most Hasids have family) are unlikely to be sympathetic to their interests. So Lander will have to try to win on Brownstone votes alone--an unlikely scenario.

mole333's picture

All true

Again...which goes back to my thinking others may emerge in both races.

Gothanonymous Reader's picture

Some more thoughts

BTW, Lander's original quote was published by him in an extremely interesting anthology called "Wrestling With Zion", which includes a wonderful anti-anti-Zionist essay by the late lamented Ellen Willis.

In thinking it over, the current front-runner for the Hasidic vote would seem to be Hammerman, who is close with former Beep Howie Golden, who once represented the area on the Council. Of course, Golden supported Craig the last time, and Hammerman still got crushed there (and everywhere else). And, of course, the last time Howie was still in office with a lot more pull. Plus, it's now eight years later, and most of the Rabbis Howie was close to are probably peacefully residing on the Mount of Olives.
Still, Craig's got better Orthodox contacts than anyone else.

Craigs' problem with the Orthodox last time was partially tone-deafness--he thought the Hasids wanted to hear about social conservatism, instead of about money and zoning. He whispered to them about flag-burning and school parayer, and then once he saw it wasn't getting him anywhere, and was getting back to the Slope and hurting him, he denied ever doing it. The tone-deafness continues to this day, with him being quoted in the Brooklyn Paper blaming his mother for his loss in the last council race. While it's clearly meant humorously, candidate's without a sense of humor should probably refrain form making jokes.

Craig is certainly the non-liberal in the current field. Not that he's conservative; he's not; he's a technocrat, who really believes that ideology does not enter into local governance--that there's no Democratic or Republican way to pick up the garbage--the boy seems unfamiliar with privitization. Clearly, he's not the choice of the Daily Gotham crowd.

mole333's picture

Well...

I met and liked Craig. He was NOT tone deaf when I went to a CB6 meeting. So maybe he has learned. Or maybe I just caught him on a good day. But Craig was the one I thought might have the best shot of the current crowd with the Hasids, though I also know others have some connections and tactics that may work if no one else enters the race.

Of course I know Josh better and am supporting him. So Craig's being approachable the one time I met him didn't make such a difference with me personally, but it did make an impression. He didn't need to show his interest but he did. And I remembered that. That is what can make a good politician.

That said, the Daily Gotham crowd on average (though you are over simplifying our crowd, me things) may well prefer other candidates than Craig. Pandering to social conservativism probably doesn't work well in Brooklyn...unless you are Noach Dear and people want to sidetrack your ambitions, in which case it gets you a machine endorsed judicial position.

Gothanonymous Reader's picture

Stephen Levin- Not to be underestimated

After reading the Brooklyn Paper’s piece today on the candidate looking to run in the 33rd City Council District, I have to disagree with your above post regarding Stephen Levin for several reasons. First, it seems pretty clear that Steve Levin is running, and as someone who has known him for several years, I can tell you that he is an intelligent and hardworking individual with a strong commitment to public service. You may not be very familiar with the much of the district, especially that part of the district in Williamsburg and Greenpoint, but many people I have spoken to favor him as the next Councilperson. I think you do your own reputation a disservice by underestimating him as an individual.

Moreover, for everything you wrote about the Brooklyn Papers piece, it doesn’t really seem like you read it. As the short article states, prior to working for Assemblyman Lopez, he ran a lead-paint safe house program, and an anti-predatory lending program. I’m not sure what your background is, but you probably understand that protecting children from lead-paint by providing them with a safe place to live while their homes are being repaired is a real world, direct services job that probably kept children from being poisoned. As for predatory lending, I mean, how important is that issue right now? Also, you cynically predict that his buzzword will be affordable housing. Could that be because the sixth sentence in the Brooklyn Paper’s piece states that he puts affordable housing at the top of his priority list? Brooklyn today is facing a severe housing crisis, something the people of the 33rd unfortunately know all too well, and I am sure that they will be less cynical about Stephen Levin’s message and experience than you are.

My main point is that your post seems to jump to conclusions without really taking an honest look at the candidate or even his statements. For the sake of the voters of the 33rd City Council District, this race should be about issues, ideas and implementation, not insulting attacks and cynicism.

mole333's picture

You Damn Him With Faint Praise

Look, first of all, whether you like it or not, the fact that Levin allies himself with someone tainted by accusations of corruption really is a major issue to most voters. I don't know how much you have talked with voters in Brownstone Brooklyn, but they are majorly turned off by the Vito Lopez machine and association with that machine really can, in some cases, hurt a candidate. Levin WILL be affected by this.

As to your point, you are damning Levin with faint praise. ALL the candidates mention have some genuine community service under their belt. Levin included. Good for him, but that is kind of a given when it comes to this kind of thing. Okay, so maybe in Vito Lopez's machine you can be an unqualified, homophobe and be endorsed for a judicial position, but in most circles you have to have DONE something before running for office. All the candidates mentioned have done some good work. Levin did some good work then went on to become the chief of staff of someone who is widely viewed as corrupt and far from honest. Others did some good work for the community but DIDN'T go work for the machine. Sorry, but if that is all Levin has, it is really just the bare minimum. If community work is all it takes, well maybe I am qualified! Between my scientific research, saving a European synagogue, helping save a woman's shelted on the Siuox Indian reservation, pushing for renewable energy solutions, publicizing Kiva microlending, etc, I can put together a good portfolio of community service, just like Levin. Doesn't mean I expect to become a City Council rep!

So I congratulate Levin on his community service. But he is far from alone in that. Voters want more than that. These days they want more honesty, integrity and openness than the Vito Lopez machine has been giving. So I think Levin will not be welcomed by many of the voters in the district that elected Yassky. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

Gothanonymous Reader's picture

Reilly- Did he really just pass the NY Bar Exam in 2005?

Is it true that Reilly only passed the bar exam in 2005? That means he probably didn't become a lawyer until the beginning of 2006. And why does he seem so secretive about who he works for?

mole333's picture

Ummmm...

Nothing you say gives any real information. We don't encourage this kind of tactic.

What difference does it make when he passed the bar? You do not have to even be a lawyer to be on the City Council. If you are trying to imply he is young, well so what?

As to who he works for, I strongly suggest you fill in some details as to what your complaint is. I find veiled hints of smears to be pretty irritating. Come right out and say what you have to say or don't say anything. We are very likely to edit out comments like this one if they get carried away.

WBer's picture

33rd and North Brooklyn

A couple other points on the 33rd:

Both Levin & Thies live in Williamsburg/Greenpoint (Levin recently moved here, Thies has been here a while longer). Levin's entry into the race potentially splits the North Brooklyn (non-Hasidic vote). To some extent, this takes away from Thies' "home base".

So absent the Hasidic endorsement, Levin's entry may serve to split the vote up here, helping out Simon (who has far less name recognition here).

The North Brooklyn part of the 33rd does not coincide with Lopez' district - it largely bypasses the Hispanic parts of the neighborhood, taking in the Northside, Greenpoint and some of Italian east Williamsburg. Vito certainly has sway, but this is not necessarily his base.

Outside of north Brooklyn (Greenpoint in particular), how resonant is the affordable housing issue? In other words, how many voters would put this as their top priority? The answer, I think, would be different in the 34th (which is more of Vito's base).

Gothanonymous Reader's picture

I live in North Brooklyn -

I live in North Brooklyn - everyone I know sees any association to Yassky and Lopez as a red flag to watch out for. They both sold out the local community for massive developer contributions - it goes far beyond simple things like 'affordable housing', and more into the entirety of the rezoning plan, which amounted to piss-poor public planning, ignoring any basic infrastructure needs, and sweetheart developer deals and kickbacks. Many will be happy to see them go, and their underlings pushed out of city government.

brought to you by


Current weather

NY - New York City, Central Park

day-broken
  • Broken clouds
  • Temperature: 77 °F
  • Wind: Variable, 3.5 mph
  • Pressure: 30.01 inHg
  • Rel. Humidity: 69%
  • Visibility: 8 miles

Visit Our Sponsors

Premium Advertisers


Upcoming events

Poll

Subscribe to our daily digest

In keeping with the "city that never sleeps" tradition, keep up to date with our daily syndication digest.



Powered by FeedBlitz


culturekitchen Media

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Fresh dissent served daily
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers Network
BlogSheroes

A new kind of voyeurism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] dailygotham [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Random image

Letter to Sheldon Silver 2

Who's online

There are currently 3 users and 732 guests online.

Blogroll

Editors and Contributors

Mole's Progressive Democrat
New Democratic Majority
Alien and Sedition
Dan Jacoby

The Indies

Adirondack Musings
The Albany Project
Angry Brown Butch
Atlantic Yards Report
Blue Spot
Buffalo Pundit
Buffalo Geek
Bike Blog
Brooklyn Rail
The Community Alliance
Danger Democrat
DDDB
DragonFlyEye
EverythingNY
Gowanus Lounge
Hell's Kitchen Online
Joshing Politics
Mamita Mala
Mamapalooza blog
More Gardens
Nassau GOP Watch
New York Games
No Land Grab
NY 13
On NY Turf
Peter King Watch
Politics on the Hudson
Open Orleans
Prometheus6
Room Eight
Steve Gilliard RIP
The Oil Drum
Troy Polloi
Rochester Turning
Simply Left Behind
Time's Up
The Working Families Party Man
Power from Truth by Chris Owens

The little big media

Capitol Confidential
Gotham Gazette
Daily Politics
Wonkster
New York Blade
NYC Bloggers
NYC Indymedia
The Politicker
EmpireZone
Power Plays
Spin Cycle

The big little media

Curbed
Gawker
Gothamist
The Politico
City Limits

Everybody Party! blogs

New Democratic Majority
Stonewall Democrats
Working Families Party's WFPBlog

The Brains

The Brennan Center
Reform NY
The Century Foundation
Center for American Progress
Drum Major Institute's DMIblog
edwize
TortDeform

The Movement

New Democratic Majority
Democracy for NYC
DL21C
Act Now
Capitol D Group
New York Democratic Lawyers Council

The Loyal Opposition

Alarming News
News Copy
Ragged Thots
Suitably Flip
Urban Elephants
Serf City

Fun Stuff

City Rag
Jossip
Overheard in New York

This list is a work in progress. Are there blogs you believe should be included (maybe your own)? Please leaves us a message through our contact page. Or drop us a line at :

editors(at)
dailygotham(dot)com


Progressive Districts

Only in New York

Just as dispiriting, party regulars chose as the convicted Norman's successor Assemblyman Vito Lopez, an old-time ward heeler from Bushwick who has never shown a zeal for reform until, gee whiz, now. He vows the party will consult a panel of learned men and women, such as Brooklyn Law School's dean, about picking quality judges.

We've seen this movie before, and the ending stinks. Two years ago, Norman and party district leaders, Lopez included, pledged they would never support a candidate for a judgeship who had not been approved by an independent screening commission. This year, for the first time, the panel reviewed Civil Court candidates.

And guess what? The party shoehorned two lawyers onto the bench without any screening. Kenny Sherman, son of district leader Roberta Sherman, will get a 10-year Civil Court term without so much as a primary. And Canarsie Assemblyman Frank Seddio was awarded an uncontested ballot line for Surrogate's Court. So much for quality control. So much for keeping your word.

Daily News (quoted from "It Takes a Blogger")