citymeetings.nyc | NYC City Council (2024)

Give me take your time.

Good morning, and welcome to the committee on governmental operations, state and federal legislation.

At this time, we actually could please place phones on vibrate or silent mode.

Thank you, chair.

We are ready to begin.

Please just state your name for the and your position for the record.

Just before you do, commissioner, I'd like to thank Kat's member, Ina Vernica, for joining us as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, Chair Rustler and members of the committee on governmental operations.

Thank you.

Thank you so much commissioner.

That was a clear and informative testimony and very helpful.

We appreciate you being with us today.

I would love to start on the fleet and really excited about improvements that you all have been making around safety.

And excited to experience 1 of what it's like to drive one of these vehicles with resistance to, you know, speeding.

Intelligence speed assistance.

Intelligence speed assistance.

Thank you so much commissioner.

And I really I know there's state legislation to expand that, and I think it's a great idea.

So I just am enthusiastic about it.

But and I wanna also note to you and and to deputy commissioner Herman's credit I was really impressed by the fleet reduction goals that you all demonstrated in the PMMR.

Almost every agency shrunk their fleet year over year.

No easy feet, and you all deserve a lot of credit for it.

The 2024 preliminary capital commitment plan includes $6,800,000,000 for DECAS for FY for fiscal years 24 through 28.

This is a $1,000,000,000,000 decline.

A $1,000,000,000 cut.

That is approximately 13% of the decast capital budget since the adopted plan that has been cut.

This is twice the rate of the overall cut to the city capital plan, which was about 6%.

And notably, decast projects represent 17% of the total funding cut to the plan.

It's just worth taking a moment.

To acknowledge these numbers in simple ways for us all to understand.

The mayor implemented a 6% cut to the capital plan of city agencies, but he doubled that for Decast.

It was a 13% cut to the Decast capital budget, and 17% of all cuts to the capital plan happened in the Decast budget.

I'd like to focus in on the energy conservation projects.

Thank you very much, Sharon.

Thank you, commissioner.

Always good to see you.

So I have a couple of questions.

So I would appreciate I would appreciate that.

Also, I see that the current year budget includes $13,700,000 for facade projects.

Does that include like getting rid of scaffolding?

Ugly scaffolding that we see all over the place.

Well,

we're we're doing our best to give it a scaffolding, but I'm gonna have to pass it over to to my colleague, Joe Wagner, the deputy commissioner.

See, we get to see all of your staff now, commissioner.

Absolutely.

Yes.

That that's true.

Just we are doing we we are trying to get rid of all the scaffolding has been doing a local law of inspections.

We're trying to right now, we got some expense money to OMB has been funding us for some expense money to get some of the work done.

As you see in the budget, we had $9,700,000, which we have completed.

We will complete basically by the end of this fiscal year, 5 projects, so within Cool droops and facades, We're also basically, we're working on all our local law work to try to eliminate the shedding.

What we're trying to do is Also, as we're getting the reports, we're trying to do to work with a contractor.

Alright.

We got some requirements contracts now, so we don't have to put up sheds.

And prior years, the minute you got your local law inspection report, we were putting up sheds.

Now we're trying to work simultaneously with the inspection and doing the repairs at the same time.

And I appreciate that.

And I think I think it'll also be helpful if, you know, because our constituents, decast them as nebulous.

Like, nobody really has a grasp of that.

So if we can bring you out to our communities, I'm gonna ask, you know, to give a presentation and things like that.

I think that would be very helpful so that people understand, and I think it would be helpful to you as well.

And also in terms of the civil service, all of that.

So, you know, I wanted to I wanted to mention that the last question I have is that Let's see.

Hold on.

Thank you so much, Cosmo Rochelman.

I'm gonna pass it to Kat's member Brewer and from there to Kat's member Carr.

Thank you very much.

You should know that yesterday at OMB, several agencies stated that they are doing hiring halls

Mhmm.

And they said they're doing with decast.

Just so you know.

Yes.

No.

We we provided them with like I said, no.

They said in the future, they're doing it with the

Oh, wow.

Okay.

So I missed that point.

I didn't see that hearing thing.

I I'm just letting you know.

I pay I go to all the hearings.

I pay attention.

But then if we tell them to rent up, I think we should also, along with the chairman's notion that, you know, local law 97 should also apply to the city when you see a vacant store that is city owned building, I know you got rid of the pot shop, the smoke shop.

That was good.

But I'm just saying in general, I'm trying to get rid of 70 of them.

So congratulations.

I'm getting rid of 1.

The we need to rent up.

So everything they would bring more tech people in, of course, they don't stay long with another whole topic.

You have you maintain them and familiar.

No offer from council member Brewer.

Thank you.

I share her enthusiasm for the city store.

It is a place that I buy many, many, many of my presence.

I would like to now pass it to council member Carr.

Thank you, chair wrestler, fellow Brooklyn colleague.

Commissioner, good to see you here.

I wanna ask you a little bit about the non public school security guard program.

Okay.

Thanks so much, Kat's member Carr.

I would like to acknowledge my friend and neighbor, Kat's member Gutierrez, and pass it over to Kat's member, Honeyif.

Thank you, chair.

Hi, commissioner.

Thanks for being here.

I'll jump right in wanna understand Decast's role with the asylum seeker response.

Decast's budget includes $380,000,000 in fiscal School 2024 and $403,000,000 in fiscal 2025 for asylum seeker expenses.

What is Decast's role in the city's asylum seeker font's efforts.

So we do not provide direct service.

However, we have been called upon to assist with our licensing forties.

As you know, we have a real estate division.

So there are 2 licenses that we executed on behalf of the city.

We also handle any payment of bills and the management of those invoices.

So at the time that our partners at NICE have an H and H that provide direct service, when they have a bill or invoice, we handle that for them on the back end.

And then, also, we've been called upon to assist with our contracting expertise.

So what type of services does decast provide directly or contract for.

We don't provide any direct service.

You know, we handle the bill paying.

We executed the 2 leases, and we were able to piggyback off of the emergency services contract that had been negotiated at the federal government level.

And it's for those 2 agencies specific.

NICEUM And Health And Hospitals.

Yes.

They provide direct service.

And then Randall's Island, Floyd Bennett Field, Creedmoor, psych facility are the asylum seeker facilities contracted through DCAS?

Yes.

I'll have my agency chief contracting officer respond.

Sure.

Yes.

So those sites are contracted through one of our Decastitywide requirements contracts.

Mhmm.

That contract was established way before the silo secret crisis.

I think the initial established run of the Garner contract was about a decade ago after Hurricane Sandy, but health and hospitals in Nice summer using Garner Service through our citywide contract.

You said a decade ago?

About yeah.

I think the original registration was about 2014.

And then why was has chosen to administer or operate these locations, considering every other agency involved has experienced managing.

So again, this goes back to just the as the contract Right.

We're not managing that location.

Not right.

I wanna ask about the recent report comptroller and lender published on asylum seekers spending.

Decast has held a master contract with Garner, which you just alluded to, that agencies can helpfully use to purchase essential services.

At prenegotiated rates.

We were surprised to find that different agencies were paying wildly different sums for the same exact service off of this contract.

H and H is paying a $117 per hour for security guards while NICEIM is paying $79 per hour for the same exact security guard service.

It's worth noting that the city has an existing contract with FJC, a unionized security operation that pays $24 per hour for the exact same service.

Or approximately 1 5th of the cost of the highest garner rate.

And just to put in real numbers for a 100 security guards over a month, taxpayers would be saved $3,000,000 at lower garner rate $7,000,000 if we paid the FJC rate.

Despite this being a decast held contract, We read that other agencies were responsible for providing administrative support and reviewing documentation and invoices.

But as a keeper of the master contract was decast, decast aware of these extreme disparities in security guard pay off of the same contract, and should the master contract be revisited to reduce security service costs and tighten the range of acceptable rates.

Before Roman responds, I just want to mention that in our view of the report, there are some inaccuracies that we're actively working to respond to in writing relating to Landers' report.

So Could you

share what those inaccuracies are?

Uh-huh.

So just to start off with the initial accuracy, the report calls out that DCAS had a master contract with security guards.

At the time of their emergencies, our master contract with FTC actually expired in November 2022.

Way before the solemn crisis started.

There are But

you don't have the master contract with FGC anymore?

Yes.

That that expired in November of 2022.

There are DHS as an active contract with FTC?

No.

So so the report calls them active contracts.

Some agencies have extended their previous task orders, but those task orders are set for certain scopes of work.

So like Decast has a task order with FJC to provide security guards to our 55 buildings, we wanted to provide security guards to separate sites of asylum seekers, we would have to issue a new task order.

But the contracts expired, we would be unable to issue a new task order.

So what the comptroller's report shows that there are contracts in effect.

Those are really task orders, but there are for specific scopes of those agencies.

So that that's the initial inaccuracy.

A lot of the controls report also tries to go into titles, the necessary top titles, whether security officer, security supervisor, Those prices were previously negotiated by the federal government.

So our contract, and it's not only the DCAS.

The state has a contract with Garner also for the federal GSA schedule.

Many states localities and municipalities have contracts off of the federal schedule, but the rates are negotiated by the federal government, not the gas, not any other state.

So we have to abide by the federal government's rates that was procured.

Those rates are not to exceed, so certain scopes and certain instances agencies that are requesting services from Garner could negotiate down rates.

But, again, even that the rate of FTC's contract was $24.

That's really the prevailing wage.

FTC does charge, you know, overhead and profit on top of the prevailing wage schedule.

So the rate for FTC contracts were not $24 for security guards officer.

But just if I may, the disparity, the the different agencies were paying for garners through the garnishment contract for security guards off the same contract, is Decast not looking at the back end to say, NICE is paying x, h and h is paying y, there's a major discrepancy here.

We should be making sure that if agency x is negotiating a lower rate than every agency should be benefiting and paying at that rate.

That's I mean, it's a it's a

major disparity.

So so as the compliance piece, again, so we we have them not to exceed issued by the federal government.

So let's say it's whatever dollar value is.

The the negotiation to lower a value of the Naartok Cedar is based really on scope of work of the agency.

Now when it comes to the asylum seekers, whether NICEM H and H was paying separate.

I don't think that could be true because H and H and NICE and WER managing 1 one contract.

Right?

So DGAS issued POs for Creedmoorford Benfield in Randalls Island.

All of those are collaboratively managed by H and H and like, buy some together in collaboration.

So it's really one contract swap.

I I haven't seen the paperwork that they're paying the different rates.

The only other agency that's using Garner right now on their own outside of the DCAS, NYSEM H and H collaboration, is a p HPD for Jefferson.

I don't know their rates.

I know at some point when they initially entered into an agreement with Garner, there was some rate conversations that they called me into trying to negotiate down and we did.

But for the report that H and H and NICE are paying different rates.

It's one they're they're managing one contract.

So I I have to We would

greatly appreciate if you could back up any documentation or any response to the chair with control or land or on potential or alleged inaccuracies of the report could be shared with the committee as well.

Absolutely.

I can't remember any did you have anything else you wanna you're good.

I kick it over to council member Paladino.

Oh, and could you identify yourself for the record?

My name is Roman Guppen.

I'm the chief contracting officer for Diaz.

Thank you, sir.

Hi, and thank you very much, Roman.

Your questions are for

you, so don't get up.

Right.

I just want some really some clarity here.

Security guards.

That are currently taking care of our migrant centers.

Just to be clear, $119 an hour.

Is that so is that accurate?

They are getting paid a $119 an hour.

So from the

Go ahead.

Garnet contract, I don't believe so.

I have to check the documentation.

Currently, the the 3 sites that Decast has POs and ping invoices of, the Floyd Bennett Greenmore and Randall's Island.

Gartner is not providing security guard services.

Okay.

Who is Garner?

Let's be clear.

Make that very clear to me.

I'm new to this committee.

Who is Garner?

Garner Environmental is a prime contractor that is building the base camp sites at those three locations.

Okay.

So they build the

the Yeah.

But but the services that they're providing, security guard services is stripped out of those 3 sites.

And I believe h and h is contracting directly with their own security guard firm to provide services

have any of you ever seen the security guards at our migrant centers?

Have any of you had any interactions with them I have?

And I'm gonna tell you, they are poor at best.

They could barely speak read or anything.

I've had 2 in my district.

And if these people, while there's people out there starving, And these people are making this kind of money.

This is an absolute sin.

I have you down for 1:19 an hour, then I see a discrepancy of $79 an hour, which is also blasphemy.

And then I see here, I took a quick little note, $24 prevailing wages.

Explain to me, please.

1197924.

Because $24 seems about right.

Anybody who's getting paid at any of the migrant centers that I've been to, anything more than $24 an hour, The taxpayers of this city are getting robbed.

Big time.

And we could use this money elsewhere.

What security firms are we hiring?

That we are putting people into these centers, that when I go there and I visit often, can't even talk to me.

I don't understand.

When I deal with DHS or anything like that, Primo.

Excellent.

But when I go to these and we're dealing with outsourced security agencies Security guard agencies, they are disgrace.

And I'd like to know what they what kind of income they're making because I know people who are out of work that if they could do this for a living and make that kind of money, You'd have a line out the door.

So please explain to me, I I don't understand.

Who in hell is getting $119 an hour?

To sit in a migrant center for 12 hours and do nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

So

I was

saying, as mentioned, as Roman testified that the security guard services are stripped out of the Gartner contract, where we pay those invoices, but we are happy to share your sentiments with those agencies that have carved out the security role.

As I also see, I wrote a little note here about the feds.

What do the fed the federal statistics?

What do they when you mentioned the federal government, what what role do they play in this, if any, at all?

You mentioned federal government.

Can you please go over that?

Yes.

Just first on the security guards, the the report that issued that there's guards that are making $24 towards the premium wage or the guards that you see at DHS, Those are actually the decast contract regards through FJC.

Right?

So the report is saying that decast has has or had because the contract expired.

A contract where the guards are making prevailing wage schedules for overhead profit, and the Department of Homeland Services currently using our FJC contract as a task order from the previous contract.

As far as the federal government question, that garnered environmental contract that we entered into from 2014 and are still in today

Mhmm.

Was a the way we procure it instead of doing a competitive solicitation, the federal government already did the procurement and the competitive solicitation on the country's behalf, and every state municipality, Merrill Agency, could tap into those contracts by doing that into governmental procurement.

And that's how we got garden environmental.

We used the federal government's procurement Mhmm.

And we piggyback off of it and got into a contract.

Okay.

Well, all I could say is these security guard companies that have been hired really need to be looked at because nobody's worth a $119 an hour when there's people out there that could barely make a living flipping hamburgers in McDonald's and paying a mortgage.

Absolutely ridiculous, and it's a sin.

Thank you.

Counselor Paladino, I I'll just say, I appreciate very much that Decast holds lots of master contracts, that agencies all purchase off of them.

It's a lot of different moving parts.

But there is an expectation of doing more than just paying the bills and processing the invoice, but providing a level of oversight that we're getting the most efficient purchasing for with taxpayer dollars and cost effective purchasing with taxpayer dollars.

And I'm a little I'm quite surprised if I heard Mister Kaufman's testimony correctly that, you know, you're totally questioning the validity of the controller's report and the discrepancy on the pay on the Garner contract.

If in fact that report had inaccurate information, we'd very much like to understand that as quickly as possible because the findings that the controller shared were very disconcerting to us or to me and were widely, you know, reported in the press.

And so you know, it's been some time.

I know we're all busy people, but to not have a clear answer at this point after that report has been issued, is surprising.

So we hope to get clarity as quickly as possible.

You've all.

Thank you.

Okay.

I and I'm gonna just keep going on a few more questions being mindful of everybody's time.

I did wanna just ask about something that director Xi had testified to yesterday.

Is there a cap on how much how many beds the state is willing to fund at the 3 sites in decasses the 3 asylum secret sites in decasses purview.

Sorry to bring it back up here.

Don't get too comfortable.

Sorry.

Can you repeat that question?

Sure.

I apologize.

Is there a in in reference to directors, he has testimony yesterday, the is there a cap on the number of beds that the state is prepared to fund at these three sites, Randall's Island, Floyd Floyd Bennett Field, and what's the third one?

And Queenmore.

Thank you.

Of course, Queen's.

So and Creedmoor, the admin is claiming that there's a 600,000,000 gap and that there was a

could you just help us clarify what's under what's happening here?

So so DCAS is not involved in any funding decisions or reimbursem*nt decisions, right, when we were asked to enter into the PO and currently paying our invoices.

We are provided with funding by OMB for the estimated dollar value for the fiscal year, but we are not in conversations or for reimbursem*nt or anything on the states level?

Right.

So that would have to be something that's posed to OMB.

We just don't have any line of sight into that.

I understand we will follow-up with o and b.

I just have to say it I think it's odd that classes involved at all.

I I appreciate your role in site selection, and and that's a great resource and, you know, deputy commissioner Ringelheim and others have tremendous expertise that we value in helping to find every viable possible site for any potential use across the city.

But you know, every other agency involved, this council member, Henif noted, have expertise in providing 247 care to people in need, except for DCAS.

And so it's it's just it's a little funny that you all are expected to have 380, $400,000,000 in your budget to provide these to to fund these essential services but are not involved more than invoicing.

Right?

And it just it makes it hard for us to know where to go for the question.

And to get the answers that that New Yorkers deserve.

Okay.

I'm gonna try to go fast.

I really appreciate a customer member Schulman's questioning around the Decast headcount and workforce.

There was just one follow-up question I wanted to ask, and this was related to commissionary or comment on the hiring calls.

Do you have a current vacancy rate in the human capital division?

And would enhanced staffing in that division lead to more workers getting hired at city agencies more quickly?

So I will bring up my deputy commissioner for human capital on the vacancy rate specifically for human capital.

For our agency.

Our vacancy rate is 14%.

Just and I'm happy that you're raising workforce again because I do wanna assure the counsel that despite our head count.

We are absolutely not just leaving agencies out there in terms of civil service administration and their ability to hire now that the hiring freeze has been lifted.

The technical support that we have provided them has been helping in terms of recruitment, in terms of having diverse recruitment plans, you looking at utilization data to hire a diverse caliber of talent across job categories.

If we were to have more staff, and I know I'm gonna get you, Katrina, if we were to have more staff, where I think it could be helpful is when we want to centralize certain functions that sometimes agencies get bogged down in because the civil service process and the hiring process don't necessarily correlate.

Like, if one is fast, it doesn't mean the other one is faster.

Hiring at the agency level is dependent upon your budget.

It depends upon how quickly you can get a par approved.

And how quickly you can post and get the position filled.

Civil service is ongoing.

We're always turning out exams.

However, there are certain processes administrative processes that can bog down an agency in its hiring process.

So if there was a determination to centralize some of those, I think that that would actually help all of the agencies, but that would require some additional human capital.

We would love to work with you on a proposal along those lines.

As the former deputy commissioner for human capital, if I recall correctly,

Yes.

You know this work as well as anybody.

And so we would love to to advance that together.

And just the other question I have while I have you up here that I'd love to ask is if you can give us a timeline for the FY 2023 workforce profile reports that my staff and I love so much.

Thank you.

Yes.

Thank you for that question.

Katrina Porter, Deputy Commissioner for Human Capital.

So to address your question regarding the workforce profile report, we're actively fine finalizing the next iteration of that report.

And we expect to have it, you know, released shortly.

We do understand the importance of the data and, you know, that it it is actually delayed.

But we should have something available to the council and the public soon enough.

Okay.

We look forward to meeting with you and learning more about the findings in that report.

Considering the, you know, tens of thousands of city workers that have been positions that have been cut during the Adams administration, we think it's critically important.

And can I just ask you both if you have it?

Do you have information on citywide hiring at your fingertips?

Do you do you have an understanding of the current city workforce, or is that data that you can follow-up with us on?

We can absolutely follow-up because some of that would require that we reach out specifically to those agencies.

Okay.

We would love to follow-up, and we can send that in writing on our request on on current workforce data.

Alright.

I have a a couple more questions before I get get to go to the next agency.

Renewable Rykers, we were really appreciative of the feasibility study report being released yesterday.

My understanding is about 40 acres on Rickers Island have been cleared, and are NDAs control, or I I should say, are no longer NDFC controller, NDAs control.

Are there any plans at this time to begin utilizing that space, solar panels, composting sites, or other ways that we can start generating renewable energy.

So meaningful conversations around the use of the 42 acres have not yet commenced, but we do expect them to with the availability of the feasibility studies from MOCEJ and DEP.

We are actively working now to get a meeting on the calendar with the committee members.

We did meet very early in the administration, but there were still some key roles that had to be filled.

They are now been filled, and so we're looking forward to having those discussions starting in the spring.

Okay.

We look forward to to those conversations getting underway as quickly as possible.

I think it would be very powerful to start making tangible progress on the island.

And so I hope that we'll be able to actually break ground and do and make progress in the near future.

I wanted to follow-up on another item that Catherine Rochelman asked about.

There was I think this is for a a for Mister Wagner.

The new needs of 9,700,000 that were in the FY 24 budget and I think it's 590 in FY 25 for emergency for facade and roof repairs.

How many specific buildings does this new really one time investment cover.

Are you able to quantify the number of buildings that will see their scaffolding removed as a result of this investment.

And then on the flip side, just because to be cognizant of time, all the cuts that were just announced subsequently in the Decast Capital Plan, the $1,000,000,000 of cuts, is not going to generate additional scaffolding that is gonna be up for longer periods of time as facade improvements and roof repair projects get delayed.

So if you could just help us on both of those items.

I know it's there's a lot there, but and we're if you could give us the top lines, we would appreciate it.

So definitely as it relates to the 9,700,000.

There are 6 locations that are impacted.

So specifically for facades, it's 88 dash 11 septon Boulevard.

That is also a location where as opposed to scaffolding, we are working on the installation of the netting.

There's also 26 Central Staten Island.

And 253 Broadway.

So that's covered under the facade.

For roof repairs, we have 60 Center Street, 80 Center Street, and 10 Richmond Terrace.

And so while certainly our goal is to try to remove all the shedding, we've estimated that we can probably remove about 50% of that.

But we certainly would fine tune our analysis and circle back to the council with additional information.

So Camilla gets to Chris Marte gets 3, but none for bro.

I knew you were gonna do none for bro.

So

That's perfect.

Just you know, I got to another choice.

Brooklyn or Brooklyn, we have finished 210.

Well, those scaffolds down at 210.

345.

The scaffolding We

deserve real credit at 345.

Thank

you for that.

Got it.

That is finished in.

And 60 will be 360.

What can you tell me?

360 will be started in 2020 in mid 2025 and should be completed by mid-twenty 27.

So by mid-twenty 27, no more scaffolding in front of 360 items because Right.

You know, it was the year I graduated from college that that scaffolding went up.

Is my 40th birthday's coming up.

I'm just saying like it's been a minute.

So okay.

Alright.

I appreciate it.

Is there could you and could you just speak to the capital budget cuts?

Does that have any impact on facade and roof projects that mean scaffolding will be up for longer periods of time.

Right right now, we're we're working on it.

The the budget cuts right now did impact some of our life safety projects, but it didn't impact any of our facade projects at this moment.

So you don't believe that any of the $1,000,000,000 in cuts of the decast capital plan will lead to scaffold to being up for indefinitely period longer period than

I know.

Because I'm trying to work hard on trying to not put scaffolding up as I do the inspections and get the at least the unsafe condition taken care of to do the capital project.

In the meantime, I don't have to put scaffolding up.

Okay.

That should be working very hard.

I have somebody working very hard on that, and we seem to be really following through pretty good on that.

Well, that is helpful progress.

We're happy to hear it.

Thank you very much.

And we'll look forward to having a celebration when the work is done in the book a municipal building and a 36 Adams.

Thank you to you and your team and especially to to Laura for their for all your great work.

The 354,000,000 in growth in the Decast 2025 preliminary budget is primarily attributed to asylum seekers spending.

Is that right?

Yes.

And the 25 contract budget for Decast totaled $463,000,000, but we found that 407,000,000 was in the other professional services bucket.

Is that asylum speaker spending?

And tell me if I can clarify that question further.

Is for Simon's Secret.

403,000,000 of that is for Simon's Secret Spending.

Yes.

That's helpful.

And We've seen the city workforce shrink by tens of 1000.

You all are pursuing a dynamic remote work pilot that that I'm certainly excited about that I hope will improve retention rates for city workers.

But we haven't yet seen a reduction in the city leased space.

And, you know, rather than cutting, spending on electric vehicles, Keith, or other necessary investments, I would think this is an area where we could reduce underutilized space that we're spending a lot of money to rent out.

Is that something that we're that is in the process of being analyzed?

Is there any progress that you can report on that effort?

Absolutely.

We have launched a city wide space savings initiative where we've engaged all agencies The goal of the exercise is really to optimize the city's footprint given the fact that we do have remote schedules now in place.

Our goal is that by the end of this fiscal year, we'll be in a position to assign agency specific targets based on agency's current footprint, headcount, and need for desks.

Okay?

We are eager to understand progress on that front.

And I think, you know, as you help us understand some of the the current staffing levels at city agencies and how that's changed over time.

We wanna be looking at those same agencies about whether they need as much lease space as as they do.

Oh, gosh.

I texted the wrong person.

The I texted my wife a question that was.

She was laughing at me.

I wanted to ask you about average building cleanliness.

We saw this in the PMMR that the non court spaces.

The average building fundliness and condition rating for decast managed non court spaces was down 10% from 72% to 62% Could you give us any insight in this decline and is there any and how what you're doing to reverse it?

So the decline was certainly relating to some attrition.

We have custodial city custodial assistance that performed that work.

The nature of that work is very difficult, in some cases, physically taxing, and it's very difficult to retain staff in that particular role.

That is one of the titles we're actively and aggressively working with OMB to to backfill our our positions.

And there were also some other priorities that had impacted the nature of their work where we had to have staff float between locations and close proximity.

That is helpful.

I I certainly wouldn't have thought I mean, I'm disappointed to hear that staffing is the the primary challenge behind it.

I think that covers all the questions I had asked, but I just wanna ask you commissioners to anything else we didn't cover today that you would like add oh, okay.

I'll have one more question.

Then we'll go to

No.

You'll close it.

But I my question is 22 Weed Street the status.

And then I am supportive.

Do you own part of Wars Island?

I know the state has some.

The city has some.

I want Wars Island to become a Roosevelt Island.

So I've been pushing for that.

But is that something that you also have any knowledge of those two questions?

I think that we have only a small portion on Woods Island, but I can circle back with this Okay.

Next year.

And what's with 22 breed?

I remember Well, it's got it was city planning.

Now there are agencies in there.

We have a burial ground issue, and I didn't know if you ever gonna keep it, sell it.

I just didn't know the status.

So I know we don't have any plans to sell it.

Okay.

And I know that there have been host of conversations around potentially demolishing, rebuilding.

So so I can definitely circle back.

I don't have an information with me.

I apologize.

Just been going on for about 30 years.

Thank you.

At least.

But I and I know we do own a number of the shelter sites on Woods Island that so I don't know if it's exactly how control works, but they're certainly publicly owned.

I think without I just want to close by saying commissioner, I think you were doing an impressive job, and I really wanna thank you and your team for your hard work.

Thank you.

You are a really you're a great public servant.

Thank you.

I'm very, very lucky.

I have an amazing amazing team.

Being a service provider is not easy, but they make it look easy each and every day, and I'm very thankful for them and thank you to all of you today.

Thank you.

Thank you for joining us.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We will take a very short break before the law department comes in to testify.

Y'all can get

Great.

Hello.

Thank you.

We can get started.

This is the Committee on governmental operations, state and federal legislation, and we will be hearing testimony from the New York City law department.

If you if the palace will please raise their right hand, I can administer the oath.

Do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before the committee and to respond honestly to council member questions.

Thank you.

You can begin.

Please, before you speak, Before you speak, please state your name and role for the record and counsel member Russ.

The chair Russer will be making a brief opening statement.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, ask Jayshree.

I'd like to welcome court counsel, judge Sylvia Heinz Radix, the head of our law department to to testify today, The law department's fiscal 25 preliminary budget totals $220,300,000, including 145,300,000 personnel services, to support 1404 full time positions and 75,000,000 for other than personal services.

The law department serves as the legal counsel for the city, the mayor, very selected officials like all of us and numerous city agencies.

Today, we look forward to discussing the law department's operations, the new needs, and pegs included in the preliminary plan.

So staffing at the department, affirmative litigation, PD settlement payouts, and juvenile justice, and more.

Judge, I have been pleased truly to learn about your efforts to expand the ethics and risk management work of the law department.

I'd also like to commend you and your team regarding the recent lawsuit against social media companies and for your leadership of a national coalition of cities to safeguard access to medication abortion.

We have though seen a sharp decline in the law department head in recent years.

And I am concerned about how that reduced staffing capacity is impacting your ability, the department's ability to serve our city.

I am also highly concerned about a crisis unfolding in our detention facilities.

The number of kids in jail has doubled since mayor Adams came into this, the law department plays a critical role as the team that serves as the prosecutors in many of these cases.

We've seen a 44% increase in felony arrests year over year for kids.

While diversion rates have declined and city programs that serve at risk youth have been eliminated.

Judge Heinradix, I really want to thank you for being with us today.

We look forward to your testimony.

Thank you so much.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Terrence.

I'm distinguished members of the government operations committee.

I'm having a little cold, so my voice.

It is a pleasure to come before you to discuss the law department fiscal year 2025 preliminary budget.

This afternoon, I'm joined by 1st assistant corporation council, Muriel Gertruthan, Managing Attorney, Eric Eikin Hoess, and Director of Finance, Motaira.

The law department represents the city, the mayor, the city council, other elected officials, and the city agencies in all affirmative and defensive civil litigation.

As a prosecuting agency, the department brings proceedings in Family Court alleging violations of criminal law and represent the people of the state of New York in proceedings filed in criminal court to enforce the city's administrative call.

Law departments attorneys draft and review law call and state legislation, real estate leases, procurement, contracts, and financial instruments for the sale of municipal bonds.

The department also provides legal counsel to city officials on a wide range of issues such as civil rights, education, intellectual property, land use, and environmental policy.

Did apartments work embraces all city entities and operations, our impact is tremendous.

The department currently has on board approximately 765 assistant corporation councils and 665 support professionals.

We are proud to be a diversity, equity, and inclusion leader in the legal profession with approximately 30% of our lawyers, ethnically diverse, and 58%.

Women.

The law department plays an important role in enhancing the city's fiscal strength.

Providing internal support to agencies and elected officials to ensure legal and ethical compliance.

And in advocating for the public good.

To better carry out this mission during the past year, recreated the the new divisions that you council member just referred to, the risk management division, and the ethics uncompliance division.

In prior years, I testified before this committee about the important work that was then the Torts division risk management unit working with all city agencies to mitigate or eliminate.

Risk to city residents, both short term by identifying dangerous conditions, which can be remediated quickly and long term by identifying agency operations or practices that are often the subject of litigation to discuss possible changes.

This past year, we expanded this unit into its own division in the law department, adding staff and resources to focus on this important task.

The risk management division meets regularly with city agents sees to discuss matters that are frequently the subject of litigation, to strategize about possible changes to mitigate risk.

As its own division, the risk management division has expanded its work beyond personal injury manners to risk issues across all legal disciplines.

For example, risk management attorneys are working with our labor and employment and law division attorneys to create strategies and to prevent liability from wage and hour violations.

The Risk Management Division is also embedding attorneys in our teams handling cases in which monitors have been appointed by the courts.

Their work will ensure that these costly monitorships function no longer than is absolutely necessary and provide guidance and councils to agencies to ensure that the legal issue that lead to these large cases do not recur.

Our ethics and compliance division has created in response to the overwhelming was created to the overwhelming demand for advice and counsel from Law Department's chief ethics officer from within the law department as well as throughout the city government on matters of legal ethics, representations and conflicts of interests, as well as demonstrated need for additional resources to be placed on compliance matters.

In addition, the law department separately handles various federal compliance matters, including counseling and litigation of fraud screens acts matters concerning the city's compliance with the terms of federal grants.

Additionally, the law department acquired new expertise and resources to meet new obligations in supporting the 5 district attorney's offices and a special narcotics prosecutor's office who have requested representation for their staff members in connection with proceeding before the newly formed commission and processorial conduct.

The ethic and compliance division was created to better conduct this important work as well as to create new measures to ensure compliance by city agencies with local state and federal requirements, which require monitoring, advisors, and remember and reminders that they were not currently in place within city government prior to the creation of this division.

The creation of this division also achieves for the city, cost savings.

For instance, after shadowing outside counsel for approximately 9 months, the division is now capable of representing prosecutors and attorneys in grievance proceedings eliminating the need to hire outside counsel at significant additional cost.

To provide the defense of these individuals.

The law department plays a significant role in securing funds for the city and in protecting the public good.

For example, still the work of our affirmative litigation division in the first half of this fiscal year, we recovered over $30,000,000 for the city and city entities.

This includes monetary recoveries unpaid cigarette taxes, property damage, breach of contract, idyllin violations, tenant protection, full claim act cases, securities fraud, anti use vaping, and opioid settlement payments among other things.

In addition, collection law firms, supervised by the law department, recovered over $10,000,000.

In addition to these financial recoveries obtained to compensate for violations of the city's rights.

Our affirmative litigations division continued in the fiscal year to pursue civil enforcement actions for the protection of public health and safety.

We continue to litigate against cigarette traffickers sellers of vape of flavored electronic cigarettes are vapes and marketers of e cigarettes to use.

They are approximately 50 matters either in court or under consideration to comply compliance by landlords and building owners with code requirements designed to protect tenants and the public.

In December, reached our 1st $1,000,000 settlement with the owners of 8 with the owner of 8 properties in Manhattan.

Who agreed to take corrective action at a corrective action plan.

We continue to litigate against the manufacturer's Kia and Hyundai, who decided to omit from certain car models, the industry standards anti theft immobilization devices, forcing law enforcement to respond to surging levels of auto theft with thieves participating in a viral TikTok challenge.

As you are aware, we just filed a suit on behalf of the city the New York City Department of Education, the New York City Health And Hospitals to hold social media platforms accountable.

For their contribution to the youth mental health crisis facing our city.

We also settled the first pattern of practice lawsuits under the city's freelance isn't free at enforcing compliance with the nation's first law protecting freelance workers and recovering double damages for the freelancers who were not paid.

We also anticipate saving the city over $100,000,000 this fiscal year and payouts from the judgment and claims fund through our continuing activity to compel insurance companies to defend and indemnify the city.

In these cases, we are enforcing coverage for lawsuits arising out of the work performed by private contractors and permit ease.

Every case that the insurance company sets up to defend is a case that does not have be defended by city attorneys, thus saving enormous legal resources.

Settlements and judgments paid by insurers in case is falling within the policy coverage also have the city's subs save the city substantial sums.

This past year, The affirmative litigation division achieved a milestone passing more than a $500,000,000 save since the start of that program in 1990.

A forever example is our commercial and real estate litigation division.

Which depends the city in wide range of contractual disputes.

These disputes include categories of agreement, contracts with private companies to build or repair the city's infrastructure.

Leases of important properties and contract for all types of goods and services.

These claims are largely based upon negotiated terms of pre existing agreements and typically involve significant exposure to the city.

And as and fiscal year 23, the division saved the city $50,000,000 by resolving a $150 in claims for $1,000,000.

Similarly, our tax and bankruptcy divisions, defense of real property tax assessments protected 91,000,000 in property tax receipts in fiscal year 23.

And almost 30,000,000 during the fiscal year of 24.

A large focus of our work this year was to ensure the city could adequately respond to the influx of asylum seekers arriving in our city, led by our executive team a multidisciplinary group of attorneys from across several law department divisions provided critical and timely legal advice.

The work of this dedicated group of attorneys from divisions such as legal counsel, affirmative litigation, general litigation, contracts in real estate, administrative law, and regulatory litigation enabled the city to respond to this crisis lawfully and cognizant of applicable laws and rules.

The team also litigated mild matters that arose in order to represent the city's interest in court, which was fast with litigated and continuing to litigate in upstate counties and towns to defend the city's ability to use available upstate hotel rooms for temporary housing assistance for asylum seekers ensuring the city was not limited in our ability to manage this crisis.

As you are likely familiar, Our office also works side by side with council attorneys, crafting local laws, and then defendants those law.

Us if and when they are challenged.

All of this work is in addition to our efforts to defend the city and its employees in litigation in more than 70,000 cases annually.

We've experienced an increase in pending cases, particularly and our largest division, the Tart division, where there are now more than 31,000 cases pending, included in the number of pending cases, our long standing cases, COVID 19 related cases, and newly filed Adult survivor act, and child victim act, cases.

The Toric caseload remains steady this year due to our efforts to employ new strategies to efficiently address case back up despite budget constraints.

For example, for years, tort cases involved in the Department of Transportation have been hampered by the need to at great personal course.

Search my databases maintained by the agency to locate and provide relevant material for discovery.

Working with the law department, DOT has implemented a system called universal legal search, u l s.

DOT has implemented its u s l can search across DOT's database to extract and pull relevant material for discovery production in a far more efficient manner we anticipate that USL will allow the Tartan Vision to significantly recur reduce a backlog of discovery motions including motions to strike the city's answers in cases in which the city otherwise has a meritorious defense.

We continue to pursue all other initiative strategies, innovative strategies with other agencies to manage to work across all of our divisions in the face of increased workload and emerging legal challenges.

But fear that unpress identity levels of attrition of ACCs and support professionals may outpace our mitigation efforts.

For example, we can continue to see an erosion of resources previously provided to the Tartan division that enabled us to improve case outcomes to increase in early settlements, engaging in better case preparation, and enhancing our stick court trial practice.

At the city's as the city's fiscal condition improves, we look forward to working with office of managed and budget and the city council to restore resources to successful initiatives and identify new initiatives that would allow the law department to more effectively carry out this mission.

The family court division is the 2nd largest and only prosecute serial division in the law department.

All of the work in the division is geared towards strengthening youth, families, and communities.

This mission is twofold through juvenile justice and interstate child support.

We are the presentment agency for juvenile justice, adolescent of fam offenders, and inter state child support cases, refrigerated New Year City Family Court.

And the disrehab dilutive mandate of the Family Court Act.

The Family Court Division must work to achieve outcomes that serve the needs of each individual youth brought before the court while at the same time protecting the interest of crime crime victims and ensuring the safety of the community at large.

However, these matters require resources similar to those.

Prossellorial agencies such as district attorneys.

Our family court attorneys work in approximately 30 locations, 365 days and nights a year, including nights, weekends, and holiday operation.

The amount of serious matters handled by this division continues to rise.

New York City continues to experience a significant increase in violence around firearm cases.

The number of firearm cases handled by this division is at an all time high.

In 2017, the division handled 39 for armed cases citywide.

In 2022, 384 firearm cases were referred to an invest negated by the family court division.

And in 2023, that number reached 415.

Thankfully, the numbers of homicide referrals have decreased from 8 in 2022 to 2 in 2023.

However, the number of juvenile cases referrals increased by 51.8% at 38 3.

3814 2002 to 5790 in 2023, 73% which involved felony charges despite the increased complexity of the cases.

And the challenges regarding evolving technology and attrition with the exception of the 1st year of the pandemic 2020.

This division has maintained a conviction rate of over 70% reaching 77 in 20 20 3.

Our child support case referrals also increased by 9.68% from 18 70 to 2022 to 20 51 2023.

But the goal for our youth in juvenile is to identify strengths and resources and opportunities to foster success in the community, to do so Our staff members are dedicated to outreach across the 5 boroughs, attending events in schools and in communities, in order for us to meet and support of those who may need our assistance.

In juvenile justice proceeding, the law requires a determination that balances the needs of the youth and the community.

The vast majority of cases in the division result in community based outcomes, including divergent restorative justice.

So out of matters, we look forward towards matching youth and families and impacted community members with appropriate services and opportunities gauge toward preventing system involvement, providing rehabilitation, securing restorative justice, and promoting enhanced outcomes for the youth, for families and communities in New York City.

Our staff is committed to a holistic approach.

Of these issues.

My testimony today provides a limited survey of the very broad and varied legal work performed by the lord of apartment.

By keeping the interest of all New Yorkers at the center of our work, we can do what is right and reinforce trust in government, and that is our core commitment.

I thank you for your support of the law department, and I look forward to our continued collaboration, I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you so much, judge.

For that thoughtful and expansive testimony.

We really appreciate it.

I'll start with covering a few topics and then if colleagues would like to jump in by all means.

Just firstly, I greatly appreciate the essential work of the law department.

And, you know, I think one of the city of New York's great assets are the senior seasoned expert attorneys in the law department.

And, you know, my concern is that we're not resourcing the agency adequately.

The law department's fiscal year 2024 adopted budget was $247,000,000.

According to prelim, dollar on pace to spend $284,000,000, but the FY 25 budget is just $220,000,000.

That's a $64,000,000 difference.

That's a 30% reduction potentially in spending for the law department year over year.

If enacted, that would be a hugely detrimental cut to the law department.

So could you please detail what changes contributed to law's budget dropping so dramatically between the current fiscal year as of January 25 as of January and the fiscal 25 budget.

I'd like to refer that to our Director of Finance.

Good afternoon.

Could you

state your name and position for the record?

Sure.

Motte, m o t t e.

Last name is Araf, a r a f, and the I'm the director of So the law department budget is lower in the FY 25 as a result of the OTPS.

The other than personal service budget is underfunded.

And that's mainly due to the underfunding for major cases and technology related cost, and we work with our colleagues at OMB to fund that shortfall year to year.

Given the nature of legal services, we understand that, you know, it has to be done through the process of supplemental budget.

We advise needs during the financial plan cycles, and they address them the year to year.

We have not had a year where we went into negative.

So the the budget has a whole grand balance.

But we understand that because of that nature of law legal services, they're not able baseline the funding.

I I appreciate that.

And we'll certainly dig in on some of the contractor OTPS work but it's not just a question of ODPS.

We're seeing significant shifts in the law department headcount.

You know, when you look back to FY19, pre pandemic, Eric can remember these days well.

Mhmm.

The law department had a head count of 1970.

As of January we saw it at 14 60 and you testified today that there were 765 assistant court councils and 665 legal support professionals.

That's a 18% decrease in a 5 year period in the number of lawyers that we have on staff.

That is a huge reduction.

More than 1 out of 6 lawyers in law department has disappeared in the last 5 years, and yet you all have more work to do than you did back then.

For a long time, the law department had celebrate was celebrated as the largest law firm in the New York City, the people's law firm.

But that's how our are true.

Kirkland and Ellis has more attorneys than the law department.

That's crazy, and that is wrong.

And we should be investing in the department because when the law department doesn't have capacity, every other agency in city government has slowed down.

So I'm particularly concerned about Well, actually, there's 2 questions I'd like to ask you here.

1, f y24 exec plan, a limit in fiscal 24, the exec plan baseline cut 63 baseline positions were removed from the law department.

And there's a new no there was a new November peg that cut 56 more positions.

So that's a further 119 person staff reduction at the law department, which has already undergone significant staffing cuts in the last number of years.

How can the law department perform its essential functions with this historically low staffing levels that are continuing to significantly decline as a result of the mayor's aggressive pegs?

I got Are you finished?

I'm done.

I'm I like to speech it by a little too much.

But I but I'm but I'm serious and concerned about this.

Well, they they they have been, of course, a a decrease in staff, and not not not just because of the bags, they've been significant attrition because of COVID.

There there is still an ability or inability to to get younger attorneys wanting to be able to work from home.

So there have been some pieces that have also now coming on place are I as we were looking at it yesterday and discussing the fact that we are now because of some adjustments that we have been made working with OMB, we've been we've been able to do something with our salaries and and and council member brokerage would tell you the last time I was here, she was talking about the law department salaries and our inability to compete.

We are we have been been able to make some of those adjustments.

And I believe it has made our department more attractive and and we are seeing now as we are recruiting, we're seeing the interest coming to the lot department.

So Those are things that we we have been working to put in place to do the work that we've doing.

We're doing.

And you said, and then we agree.

We We have a committed group of of of of of people who work for the law department, who are interested in doing city work, And in in spite of our deficits, we've been able to to meet get do the work that we're supposed to do on the behalf of the city.

Judge, can you lay out for us how are the savings determined from the most recent pegs and what will be the impact on agency operations?

You have the art,

if you want.

Sure.

So in light of the our budget condition and and the headcount that was just mentioned, We try where possible to bring in revenue to meet the pegs.

In the absence of that, we work with the OOB task force where it's not possible that the revenue will be realized on time.

They look into our attrition, into our vacancies condition.

And they plug in a difference.

So that, for example, 56 reduction that you mentioned, it's a one time reduction.

It's not a baseline.

So the the head count Authorized.

But

in addition to the 63 baseline reduction that you had to deal with just recently.

That's good.

Yeah.

So that's a lot in in in, you know, 119 positions out of a 15 100 person workforce from about, you know, a significant impact on laws operations and capacities.

Correct?

That's what I thought.

Is there something you wanted to add?

Yeah.

Sure.

I I thought I would just and also a council member because I think your question was also, you know, how are we going you know, how do we deal with this this I think we all agree.

It's a lot of reduction.

And we work, I think, and and and I really do appreciate OMB has been reset active to our concerns when these issues arise, and we work with them to identify needs.

So one of the things is the judge mentioned that was a knowledge to us was recruitment was down.

And as a result of recruitment, we had a large number of vacancies.

And obviously, from a budgetary perspective, then those vacancies you know, the management budget will look at that and say, you have a lot of vacancies.

And we said, we wanna hire into those vacancies.

We wanna make sure that we have staff that are taking care of the needs and things like that.

And they've been, you know, partnered to us that when we've identified staff, they've been supportive, they've been creative, with and and and credit a lot of our revenue to try and reduce the number of vacancy reductions And this year, as the judge mentioned, with work from home, they worked with us and they approved a restructuring of our attorney's salary structure.

Share based on what we're seeing from the DA's office and the AG's office to make our salaries more in line and more competitive, plus we have the recent cola adjustments that were very full.

So from our perspective, we expect that we our our hiring is gonna take up.

And what we have what we've discussed with Home Depot, we'll continue to discuss in I can assure you we'll continue to to do is if our hiring makes it such that we're reaching a point where this new head count where we're going against this new headcount and their needs that are important, they they will continue to speak with us about meeting those needs, about floating over headcount of things like that.

Obviously, with no promises or commitments, but we intend to advocate, and we will work with them.

If if we have that per that personnel and if we have those needs, we will continue to make sure

Does the department expect that it will need to settle more cases instead of going to trial due to lower staffing levels?

Settling cases involve a union council member of a lot of things.

We evaluate the the exposure for the city.

We don't necessarily go to settle a case because there's not an individual person to go to trial.

That's not our bottom line.

We try to make sure that that we're doing it in the best interest of the city.

There's a possibility if we didn't settle a case, we could be we could go to trial and be post a significant judgment.

Those are things that we look at, and those are things that we have the attorneys do, and we have them understand that it is a part of the responsibility as as attorneys with licenses to go into court and to have that 1st and foremost rather than the thought that we have to settle it because of of the fact that that there's you know, we don't wanna go to trial.

I

could you please provide in writing as a follow-up to this hearing a breakdown of the headcount in each division and how that's changed over the last 4 years?

For east division?

Yes.

Okay.

We will.

Right.

That would be great.

I I you know, as a judge as you and I have discussed, I I really worry about places like the contracts division that are responsible for reviewing every contract, every RFP, every freaking and that Rita and her team need the staff to be able to review it or it slows down every agency's ability to do their jobs.

And so it's where law serves as that pinch point that I'm most concerned about, but we would really appreciate being able to analyze that together.

I believe we are too counsel, ma'am.

We we we we make sure that the areas where we see the impact that we are there is is gonna be we're critical to the city.

That we have the discussions with OMV.

Irrespective of what is is there at the time, you know, if there is a question of of the headcount for that division haven't been met, and we realized that there is something that needs to be done we have those discussions also.

I appreciate it, and I appreciate the comments about increases in salary, and hopefully that will improve our recruitment and retention.

I'm just gonna go on one more topic, and then if council member, Bruno Carr, would like to jump in.

Are you considering any actions or policy changes that might reduce the percentage increase in felony arrests that might reduce the percentage of kids that are getting sent to jail?

Well, what we what we also have been doing and and we've we've started a we we had a meeting and continue to meet with the probation department, and we're working across agencies to have that kind of discussion.

For us and and, also, you've

been encouraging the probation department to restore the programs that they've eliminated that provide care and services to young adults that are at risk.

We're we're we're we're having discussions with them about about those things and how we can collectively work together and are you advocating

for those restorations with the Department of Probation?

Because the dev diversion rates in the PMMR have declined.

For the number of youth that are being served?

We are not we haven't been advocating with them.

We've been we've been talking to them about what we can do.

And our our our role is not to tell them what they can do with this, but our role really and working with them, well, I I no.

That's a misstatement.

And working with them in in in this area.

We we have we have looked at what we see here with youth.

And And if you evaluate it, you have to realize that the the the crimes that we have been seeing now are what we have been seeing in the past.

And so there has to be a different evaluation of what we are seeing here.

Like, gun gun crimes had gone up significantly.

We at 1 at 1 or or or or I was talking to a staff who was saying, at some point, you saw 22 youth in a year with guns.

At one point, we were like at 39.

You saw it it is something that we're hap we have to look at across the board, and we're we're happy that we've been able to get the agencies to sit down together to start talking about how what we can do collectively.

I I really do appreciate that.

I I would say that when I work with the Brooklyn district attorney's office, We're often talking about investments and programs that need to be made for ATI's, ATDs, diversion programs that can keep our young that can keep people out of our criminal justice system.

And so I do feel like it is potentially your role.

You have a Department of Probation that's eliminated the next steps program.

Is dramatically defunded the archers program.

These are evidence based effective programs that keep our young people engaged and out of detention facilities.

I appreciate your comments on gun increases.

But in your testimony today, the year over year increase in gun in in in in gun cases, firearms cases that were referred to the family court division increased by 8% from in that same period, the number of youth felony arrests increased by 44%.

So we're seeing something that's much larger happening your decision, the law department's decisions, to charge these young people with felonies, means that they're being sent to the juvenile detention facility that cannot accommodate them.

And so we need your help in leadership in helping to reverse this deeply problematic trend.

I do wanna ask specifically to the unacceptable conditions in the ACS juvenile detention facilities that cannot fit more young people.

Does that is that something that you all consider in making your prosecutorial decisions?

I'd be I was reading

no.

You're fine.

I I mean, I was just I'm the the point I was making on the data was 8% increase in gun charges year over year, 44% increase in youth valley arrest.

And the gun charge increase is deeply concerning, and we definitely have a lot of work to do together about it.

The way to address it is to invest in the Department of Probation Programs that the Mayor and the DLP Commissioner have cut.

That aside, I I wanna ask specifically The ACS facilities are overcapacity.

People are sleeping.

Kids are sleeping in classrooms in unsafe conditions.

Do those realities, do those unacceptable conditions inform your prospectorial decisions to pursue felony charges and to send these kids to facilities that can accommodate them.

Well, I I it we we as we we look at what are in our prosecutorial position, we look at a holistic approach.

There's not one one thing that we look at and not the other.

So all all of these things will be taken into consideration erosion.

I and and council member, I just I have to go with your information that that kids are sleeping on and on the floors.

That is not something that I I am aware of.

It's been widely reported in the press.

At this point, we understand that the mayor and his team planning to spend many tens of 1,000,000 of dollars to expand the size of our jails for kids so that we're incarcerating more youth.

I just I think that there's an opportunity for with leadership from the law department to be prioritizing diversion and creating opportunities to get our young people on the right track, not just sending them away to jail.

And unfortunately, that's what's been happening.

We've seen a doubling of the number of kids in jail.

So this is something you'd like to add before

we kick over.

Oh,

Do you wanna know?

I'll kick it to a concert member brewers or car.

Would you like to jump in?

Okay.

I mentioned OTPS shortfall in technology.

Could you be more specific as to what the shortfall is because, obviously, in today's world, it's an incredibly important funding issue.

Yeah.

So our technology budget has always been low and then as it's we mentioned, as I mentioned before, we always try to reallocate resources to fund that shortfall.

But because of the challenges that the department has been going for the past few years, we needed to enhance our systems and and spend a great deal of funding into the infrastructure of the network.

So all that now has to be added into the basin.

We are talking to OMB to at least try to make that portion part of the baseline.

Mister Cheah, I would suggest there'd be another issue to put on your list because they can't survive without most current technology.

My favorite smoke shops.

So I have 70.

No legal.

And my question is, I know you've been working on nuisance.

Where are we doing?

How are you doing?

Closing them.

And and you know who are out.

But we've we've we've still been ongoing on with if in the law department, we're bringing nuisance actions and those people who are valid.

And I know, you you know, I

up to here, I know.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And it's it's it's something that is for the law department is is a he was challenged.

We were hoping that there would there's gonna be a change in legislation and Albany.

Right.

And I and that's where it needs to come from so that we would have more equipment here and a better ability for the city to be able to deal with these challenges that we what we're seeing with these smoke shops.

That's our plan.

Okay.

All over them.

Okay.

And then at some point, just maybe not now, but how many people are assigned to it?

I just wanna say that consumer could close them.

PD could close them.

The share us doing what he can.

I would argue that we have enough resources in New York.

I don't know what's gonna happen in Albany to close them.

So that would be something that to discuss.

Right.

I'm I'm up to here with

And we're still having we're still having on on, you know, the the administration has been very concerned about about this.

I'm concerned, but nothing is closing.

I'm very, you know, I'm practical.

Nice to talk.

I know how to close them.

So I'm just trying to be specific about how it can be done.

PB and consumer can actually close them just so you know.

During the 1st 4 months of FY 24, all cases, this is about cases against the city commenced, increased 18% from the same period in the prior year, 2838 to 3000 352, and I think the same happened on the state and federal issue.

So I know this is an ongoing issue.

It's nothing new.

We've been talking about these cases for many years.

What are we doing to try to stop the upward trend?

And, you know, how do we deal with this issue?

It's not a new issue.

I know.

And that was one of the reasons why we we implemented the new risk management division, and we we are having the the attorneys from risk management.

We've built out a whole team.

Yeah.

We're

having them talk to agencies across the board so that we can identify those issues They have been causing to see problems.

They have been causing people to to to bring these lawsuits.

That that's one of the things that we're doing.

To manage this.

But you realize to that we've had a spike based on the fact that there was COVID and and during the time that they would COVID, a lot of a lot of lawsuits that didn't really hit the pipeline and and now doing so.

So the spike numbers happens to do with with some of that.

But but the the the one thing that what that we were focused on is to making sure that people have the tools that understand the things or the behavior that would have been that's pervasive, that causes that the threats to the city in that fashion, and we're and we're looking at it and monitoring and and making sure that this division has the tools that that they that they need and the individuals that they need to work with with our agencies to to highlight this.

There's a lot of money that is taxpayer money that is used to settle these cases.

Okay.

I mean, I I believe that in the past such efforts have been made maybe with social media and more communication.

And I don't know what training involved because, you know, people do what they're gonna do.

I assume PD is the highest, but I don't know that for a fact.

And I would love to see some way of you know, working so that people don't end up in your hospices.

So let's see what happens.

Thank you.

Thanks so much, customer brewer, customer car.

Thank you, chair.

Judge, good to see you, and thank you for your service to the city.

I just wanna PICKY BACK ON SOMETHING, COUNCER MEMBER, WAS DISCUSSING WITH YOUR NEW SENSE ABATEMENT WITH THE VAPE SHOPS.

YOU MENTIONED STATE LAW NEEDS TO BE CHANGED, BUT customer powers, our colleague, has intro397, which is a reintroduction from last term, which would put some more teeth back into the city's nuisance abatement law.

With respect to allele cannabis sales.

So I think even if, you know, we're supporting the mission of legal cannabis, we need to make sure these illegal shops get closed.

So I hope that you and your team take a look at that bill because I think it could help further that mission.

Okay.

With respect to In intro397 is the new build number.

Okay.

With respect to some of the areas where I think you're working that you could actually have a significant financial impact on the city is your ongoing work with the Callahan consent decree in particular how it pertains to the current migrant situation.

So I know the position of the administration has been to take the Calham consent decree's application away from the migrant population.

My position is that it never replied And I was just wondering if you can give us an update on where things stand with that.

Of course, you know, there's ongoing litigation in Callahan.

And our position now is we are we are we've we've been working with with litigants, and we've been we've been working with the well, of course, the legalist society who's who's defending this matter.

We we are hopeful that we we can reach a a situation where we're able to project the city's interests more affect effectively than than what we saw in in the in the Callahan consent decree.

Since there's ongoing litigation and we're working, we we there's been direction from the court and and other councils that we don't we're not gonna be discussing where we're going at this time, but I'll I'll tell you we have spent a significant amount of time and legal expertise and and across our law department.

In order to ensure that the city is protected and that we we do it properly, that we're not that we're not that we are not found in contempt in any actions that we take and and those are the things that we're we're looking at.

Understood.

And you referenced in your discussion with chair wrestler and council member brewer, the new tools in your toolbox about hiring up, right, and and giving you more bandwidth to do what you're doing and hopefully go

beyond that.

So you mentioned you're gonna be hiring up.

What's your expectation for FY 25 in terms of what you hope to hire based on your your budgeted availability.

Yeah.

So I I think we start with, you know, in the past few fiscal years, we have not.

One of the reasons our headcount kept, you know, was was reducing the pegs was because we weren't.

Matching and hiring up to our head count.

So I think our our first step is we want to especially with the lower head count, we wanna hire up to that head count.

Our divisions our various divisions have have certain needs that they wanna make sure are addressed and staffed.

And so what's gonna happen is we're gonna reach that head count.

And then after that head count, we're gonna be hiring into those particular needs and working with OMB to do it.

And so I I, you know, I think, especially since a lot of these developments are recent, we don't necessarily have a goal or a projection.

But at the very least, we wanna achieve and to show that this that we can maintain a staff at this head count at a higher head count, and I think that would be our goal for this coming fiscal year.

Okay.

And and remembering that our our not hiring that was not because of our reluctance to do so and and and counsel member here will tell you that last time.

People yeah.

You you you literally couldn't couldn't hire.

I mean, there are law firms out there who cannot hire attorneys either.

That had that has been an issue.

And we were also impacted by this.

So we because of the the changes that we've mentioned, we're hoping that that that we're able to deal with that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, chair.

Thank you both for those questions.

And I just wanna say that we hope that you all will set ambitious benchmarks for hiring, for increasing the headcount of the law department, and we wanna help champion and support those goals.

We believe in the work that you do, and we want you to be resourced to be able to actually accomplish it.

And the, you know, 20 odd percent reduction in the number of people working law department over the last 5 years has a big impact on the city of New York.

And so we wanna help support the growth and return to those pre pandemic staffing levels.

I'm just going to try to cover a few more topics before we let you enjoy the rest of your afternoon.

First is NYPD settlements.

Recent analysis by the legal aid society found that in 23, the city paid out $114,600,000 in lawsuit allegations, in lawsuits alleging police misconduct.

Since 2018, these lawsuits have caused the city $548,000,000, not including any matters settled prior to litigation.

The median payout has increased during that same time from $10,000 in 2018 to $25,000 last year, two and a half times increase.

The PMR also revealed a major uptick in civilian complaints against the police under mayor Adams' tenure, up 60% from just last year.

Right?

We're seeing dramatically more enforcement, dramatically more incarceration, and not surprisingly, dramatically more complaints against police misconduct.

We can only assume that the uptick in police misconduct complaints will result in even more litigation than what we're already seeing and even greater settlement payouts.

So what steps has the law department taken to ensure that officers that are generating these repeated lawsuits are properly disciplined and that there's real accountability for the bad actors that are wasting that are mistreating New Yorkers and wasting taxpayer dollars.

So you're real good.

True fun.

When it is that we see trends in multiple cases or see something notable in even one case.

We have communications with the police department about how those issues might be remedied.

So that that's what we do.

On an ongoing basis,

And is that having any impact or effect?

Can you show any results from those informal conversations?

Well, certainly, the conversations would be attorney client privilege.

And so

That's right.

To the extent that there there are tweaks, you know, telling you that this was tweaked because there was a problem with probably reveal things that we would not be permitted to reveal.

But I do know that Because of those ongoing conversations, there are tweaks that are made and changes and

and appreciate that you've been having those conversations.

It sounds like that's the longstanding law department policy.

And yet, things are moving in a pretty extraordinary direction.

We paid over a half a $1,000,000,000 in city taxpayer money to settle these allegations of police misconduct $114,000,000 last year, what are we doing to reverse this trend?

So one thing I I I like to highlight about what is included in the police misconduct settlements, and that is a number of verse conviction cases where individuals were incarcerated for some 30 years.

Right.

And those the settlement of those cases in order to provide a measure of just this to those individuals, amounts to large numbers.

Yeah.

And and and the and it draw it those alone would drive up the average settlement if you are paying an individual 10,000,000 $12,000,000, $15,000,000.

And there are several of those cases within the past few years as are very highest district attorneys have had a view to conviction integrity.

And we certainly celebrate that prioritization on conviction review units, conviction integrity units.

Accordingly, could you provide the total payouts based on the year of the misconduct to us in writing over the last few years so that we could see that breakdown and actually understand what's coming from you know, Luc Castello from the eighties nineties and what's actually happening as a result of police misconduct today?

Yes.

I'll take it I'll take a yes.

Well, I'll I'll take a yes.

But it's it's a it's

a yes.

It's a yes, comma, because I I I want to highlight for you that, you know, in any given year, there there may be a 1000 such settlements.

So we may have to group them such that, you know, yeah, without without something that's MINEUTIA THAT WILL DRIVE YOU CRAZY.

YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE TO THINK OF A WAY THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.

And yet is meaningful.

We would be happy to follow-up with a written request.

For the information in a way that is more readily where you can respond more readily.

We're not trying to overwhelm you with a data request here, but it would be helpful to see the broad strokes of what's happening from eighties nineties, convictions being overturned, and what's happening from police misconduct today.

I do hope that the law department will consider additional actions that you all can take to rein in police misconduct to slow down the amount of settlement reduce the amount of settlements that we're paying out.

No.

Not to beat.

Not to beat a dead horse.

Council member.

But that would that's also one of the reasons why we are we've we've implemented this risk management unit to to evaluate those types of things.

To look at, to make sure that there's discussion with the agencies of specific things that we see that that are caused that are driving this.

And so

I totally appreciate that and appreciate that focus.

But, you know, the PMMR showed a 60% increase year over year in CCRB complaints.

That's a big number.

We already had more CCRB complaints if I remember this correctly in the first quarter, in the 1st 4 months of this year than we did 4 years ago over the whole year.

So we're seeing a big shift and that's because of the trends that I've already mentioned.

I won't repeat myself.

But I did wanna ask relatedly on this risk management piece The preliminary plan includes an additional $33,700,000 in city funds in fiscal year 24 for the OTPS shortfall.

My understanding is this funding is is related to court ordered monitors.

Could you let us know how many cases that covers?

Let me 7.

7.

And Nitro was by far the Case you

may Monitors.

Monitors.

Right?

Yes.

7 monitors.

Right.

Fair.

Yeah.

And the Nitro monitor was by far the greatest source of spending.

Barked you off getting a lot of money.

Yeah.

Barked it pretty well.

Right?

Yes.

Yes.

I mean, not the barked pretty well part, but the the No.

No.

Yeah.

That's a significantly larger.

Larger.

Yes.

Nice.

Nice.

And you're expecting that those costs will remain similar with the new firm that has been identified, generating block, to take over the nitrogen monitor responsibilities.

It remains to be seen.

Yeah.

Okay.

I mean, the law department spokesperson said it to a reporter that they expected the funds that they expected spending to continue at similar levels?

Yes.

But with monitorships, they send you invoices.

And so you can't say on the front end what the needs of the monitor will be.

And what caused a major decision in the determination to select a new monitor for Nitro?

The determination was not the

apartments.

Fair.

And and I and I think when you talk to them across here, they and and we check that, but it it it is not just one individual, which is ham and now there are two there are two people.

So if you're talking about it being the same cost, that may not be an accurate representative because because now two people are being paid.

Okay.

Final items for you.

Payments for judgment and claims.

According to the PMR, Payments the payouts made for judgments and claims against the city, and state and federal court increased over 200% in the 1st 4 months of fiscal year 2024 to $213,000,000.

That's up from 60,000,000 in in the same period from 2023, 4 fold increase.

What drove the increase in the 1st 4 months of this fiscal year?

One case, there was one class action that accounted for $135,000,000 in that 4 month period.

Okay.

Has the law department taken any steps to reduce judgment and claims expenditures?

Yes.

Our risk management

Alright.

Well, we're hoping to start to see some great results from that risk management division.

The last topic that I am gonna ask on unless my colleagues have any further quest I'll do 2 brief ones.

I I don't wanna make any promises I can't keep.

Asylum speak asylum seeker legal case work.

The preliminary plan included an additional 1,300,000 for legal services relating to the asylum application help center.

Could you confirm how much money has been spent to date?

Through this contract?

Yes.

As of a week and a half ago, a total of approximately a little over 17,000,000.

Right.

I would you have spent I mean, and preland was already a month or so ago, 6 weeks ago.

But why spend 16, 17,000,000 and only seek 1,300,000 in new needs?

That 1,300,000 was actually added centrally by RMB.

It's not through an action that we do at our end.

And actually, at this point, the budget is already above that $17,000,000.

I think it's been modified to 20,000,000 at this

point.

Okay.

Stay tuned.

And then the last thing I wanted to ask about is impact litigation.

That that contract you're asking about is state funded.

Absolutely.

Okay.

But still wanna make sure that it's reflected accurately in your budget and that what we're seeing in prelim are the actual expenditures of the department.

And that's a major, you know, there's a major disparity of 1,300,000 showing up in Prelin and in actuality, 16, 70,000,000 had already been spent at that time.

In 2018, the law department created the strategic advocacy initiative to expand the department's pursuit of impact litigation and and strategic advocacy.

Could you just tell us how many attorneys are focused on identifying potential new impact litigation cases?

And there was a strategic advocacy committee that was created around that time.

Does that still exist?

The

work continues in our affirmative litigation division, and it is shared by the whole of the division now.

How big is that division?

Approximately?

At most twenty people?

Okay.

Yes.

Well, any other questions, guys?

I just wanna say

We keep it we keep it funded and and staffed because we know council members.

How important it is to I know.

And then I know it's important to you, and that's why we were happy to confirm you as a counsel.

I just wanna say in closing, we deeply appreciate your work.

We we value the law department tremendously and really appreciate you taking the time to be with us today.

We wanna help support the growth the law department, and so that you have the capacity you need to thrive.

And I hope that we will be able to continue the conversation about juvenile detention.

We are deeply concerned about the current crisis that we're facing, and I hope that we'll be able to work together with other leaders in the administration to reverse the trends in the months ahead.

Thank you very much.

And I I I I will ensure you that we will have continued discussions with with the lot of part family court division and with probation, and and and make sure that people are understand what your concerns are.

Thank you.

Thank you all for joining us today.

Have a good afternoon.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

I would now like to welcome Asim Rahman, the commissioner in chief administrative law judge to testify before the committee.

Thank you for joining us today.

The office of administrative trials and hearings fiscal 20 25 preliminary budget totals 59,400,000, including 46,100,000 in personnel services, funding to support 396 full time positions, and 13,300,000 for other than personnel services.

Oat is the city's central, independent, administrative law court conducting hearings for city agencies, commissions, and boards.

Today, we look forward to discussing Oates operations and the pegs included in the preliminary plan staffing at the agency, the handling of increased summons, and special education hearings.

Since Mayor Adams came into office, we have seen a dramatic increase of cross the board in the numbers of summons being issued.

Despite the substantial increase in the total number of hearings and trials at oath, and an increase in the time it takes to issue decisions, the mayor and OMB have imposed pegs that reduce the resources Oat has to efficiently meet its mandate.

Additionally, the increase in revenue from both cases has not kept pace with the major increase in city enforcement.

I'm concerned that the increase in minor summons is disproportionately impacting Low Income New Yorkers who do not have the means to realistically pay which could lead to increase financial hardship for many families.

I wanna thank you commissioner for joining us today.

With that, I would like to please ask committee counsel chase free chronopathy to administer the oath and swear in the testifying representatives.

Thank you, chair wrestler.

We now have representatives from the office of administrative trials and hearings here to testify.

If you would all please raise your right hands.

Do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before this committee and respond honestly to council member questions?

Thank you.

And then just before you begin, we've asked all of the folks to testify today to limit testimony to about 5 minutes, and we're happy to take a longer testimony into the record.

Thank you so much.

Good afternoon.

My name is Asim Rahman.

And I'm the chief administrative law judge and commissioner at the New York City office administrative trials and hearings also known as oath.

I'd like to start by thanking chairassler and members of the committee on governmental operations, state, and federal legislation for the opportunity to testify today.

I'm accompanied by Arnab Das, deputy commissioner for administration and Brian Connell, assistant commissioner for financial services and data analytics.

Both is New York City's Central Administrative Law tribunal.

In the past calendar year, fiscal challenges have not deterred us from our mission to ensure due process fair and impartial hearings, and timely decisions for everyone who comes before oath.

All of votes, adjudicators approach this responsibility with the utmost seriousness As do the old staff who helped support our hearings, I can personally speak to this commitment.

As the chief administrative law judge, I, myself, conduct trials and conferences where I meet with litigants and their representatives listen to evidence, help parties find opportunities to settle and issue decisions that are based on the law.

Even with face with such physical challenges, oath has been able to maintain our standards by adapting our practices so that we continue to seamlessly seamlessly deliver our services to New Yorkers, city agencies, and other parties who appear before us.

The proof is in the numbers.

In 2023 alone, we processed almost 590,000 sumances.

Held over 220,000 hearings, issued close to 25100 appeals decisions, and conducted over 625 trials.

That is a tremendous volume of work, and it is a testament to the amazing public servants who are part of the oath team and who help us ensure that we deliver due process to those who appear before us.

A key ingredient to ensuring due process is keeping oath independent.

For oath, independence means that our administrative law judges and judicial hearing officers listen to all sides, review all the evidence without favor, apply the law fairly and do all of this without any external influence.

At oath, we believe there's one standard of justice for all.

The members of the public who have cases of oath are treated no differently than the city agencies that appear before us.

We do not take direction from any city agencies on our cases.

Independence also means that oath does not comment on enforcement policies, rules or regulations or disciplinary practices of agencies that file cases with us.

Our rule is just to adjudicate not to set policy.

Consistent with this when we regularly provide city council with data reports concerning cases filed with oath, you'll note that we do not analyze or make recommendations regarding that data.

Such analysis is not in our purview.

Structurally, both consists of several divisions.

Our adjudications work is handled by our trials division, our special education hearings division, and our hearings division, which it's self include our adjudications division, our appeals division, and the clerk's office.

Across these various divisions, we handle an incredible breadth of work and including the adjudication of civil summonses issued by New York City enforcement agencies against residents and entities, disciplinary matters involving city workers, violations of the conflicts of interest law, the city, human rights law, and more, and matters involving special education services provided by the DOE.

That's just a sample of what we do with oath.

Oath is also home to the center for creative conflict resolution, which is the city center for alternative dispute resolution.

Oat's mission requires that we prioritize the public's access to justice, and we do that in several ways.

We focus on language access to make sure that people who do business with OAuth can do it in the language that they choose.

We have a help center that provides free non legal advice to unrepresented individuals who have cases of oath.

And in 2023, our our help center had close to 80,000 interactions with members of the public where we were able to answer their questions and provide assistance regarding oath summonses.

We leverage technology to make the hearings process more efficient, including giving people the option of a callback when they have a hearing by phone.

We do a tremendous amount of community outreach and education work, and as you know, often in partnership with council members, where we come out to your districts and provide people with information about oath.

I know we've been to your own districts recently.

And we do so much more to help ensure equal access to justice in the city.

As mentioned, oats' fiscal year 2024 adopted budget was $65,300,000 in the fiscal year 2024 current modified budget was $62,800,000.

Oat's total preliminary budget for fiscal year 2025 will be $59,400,000.

Of the $59,400,000, 46,100,000 is in personnel services, and 13,300,000 is in other than personnel services.

Agency headcount will be 396 for fiscal year 2025.

For the fiscal year 2025 preliminary budget, That does not include 348 per session judicial hearings office her officers in the hearings division, all of whom work on a part time schedule.

In closing, oath is dedicated to providing access to fair and impartial justice for all New Yorkers.

I look forward to our continued efforts

with

the city council and welcome any questions that you may have.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

We really appreciate the thoughtful testimony Do you prefer to be referred to as judge, commissioner, what's the best way to

So the charter, it takes primacy overall.

And the charter says that I'm the chief administrative law judge of the office of administrative trials and hearing.

So judge or chief is fine.

Great.

We'll go with judge.

We'll stick it's we did judge last year, and we'll do judge this year.

So have 59,400,000 of FY 25 budget is 5,900,000 less than the FY 24 budget, approximately a 10% reduction.

The PMMR showed that summons sent to oath are up 26% from the same period last year and on pace to be almost 865,000 summons for the year that are going to oath, 60% increase since the mayor took office.

Similarly, trials are up by 6% and on track to be 66% higher than FY 21.

So summons are up 60%.

Trials are up 66%.

Since the mayor took office, and the PMMR also revealed the average time it's taking to issue decisions on trials is up 21%.

By over 6 days, and the average time it's taking to render a decision on hearings is up 33% to about 12 days.

Yet there's a bunch of cut, which just is hard to fathom.

So does the agency of the resources it needs to handle this seemingly ever increasing caseload in a timely and efficient manner.

And did you request any new needs or resources from OMB to be able to keep pace.

Thank you, chair wrestler.

I think that oath has the resources it needs to match the increase that that we are seeing if you take into account the fiscal situation that the city is going through.

Every agency had to tighten its belt, identify funds for the peg.

And when we did so, our mission was to ensure that we make those cuts while still ensuring that New Yorkers receive due process.

And receiving due process means that they are receiving decisions on their cases that are based in fact and guided by the law It has come at a cost of some of those decisions taking a little more time, but I still think we are meeting our mission of delivering due process with the staff that we have.

Okay.

I with more resources, could oath administer more timely resolutions or decisions for in both divisions?

So let's start with the Trials Division.

There are factors that can lead to an increase in time.

The most obvious factor is an increase in caseload.

But there are other factors that affected as well that are not as tied to resource and that is the makeup of the cases.

So there's a body of cases.

Every year the kind of division of those cases changes, So when we look at the 1st 4 months of the past fiscal year, the current fiscal year and compared to last year, the cases for the trials division Year over year included a 125% increase in cases relating to real estate and land use.

Those are more complicated those naturally take more time.

So it's not a delay.

It's the nature of the case just leads to more time.

In our hearings division, The summonses are handled by 2 types of individuals.

You have our full time staff.

Those are our staff attorneys.

They hear cases.

And then you have our part time per diem judicial hearing officers.

And that is a body of individuals who work part time They again are not on the full time staff, and they adjudicate these matters.

If we had additional staff attorneys, Are there matters that we could probably turn around quicker?

The answer is yes.

I mean, that is simple math that if you have greater resources in certain divisions, you may be able to to have greater efficiencies.

On the per session hearing officer side, we still have money in our budget to hire more per session hearing officers.

So more resources aren't needed because we actually have the cushion that we need to bring.

There was more egg on the per diem hearing officers.

There was.

And we put money from We put money towards that because we looked at what we had in our budget to pay the per dMs.

And we said, okay.

Even if we hire more per dMs, we still have some left.

And we were able to put that towards the peg.

We think that putting the proteome hearing officer funds towards the peg is not limiting our ability because we still have the ability to to to hire more per diem.

So last year you used 343 per diem hearing officers.

Do you expect to use more this year?

So 343 number is a number of per diem's that we have on our roster.

But because they're part time, It depends on who picks up work.

Not all of them pick up work.

There's some who maybe haven't picked up work in 2 or 3 years.

In the past 7 months, it's roughly in the neighborhood of a 180.

Per session hearing officers have actually picked up work.

On any given day, it's 50 to 70 who might pick up work.

So, you know, we're seeing this floating number of somewhere between a 180200 who actually taking the work from year to year, and we can afford it right now within our current budget.

Okay.

And just broadly while we're on the topic of staffing, the old head counts currently, I believe, at 444.

The That's 16 positions over the budgeted head count, the 428.

The f FY 25 both budgeted head count is down to 3.96.

That would represent an 11% elimination of your workforce much greater than any rate of potential attrition.

Have you taken any steps to meet this new head count goal?

Are you expecting that you will be required to require to comply with it or lay off something that need to be considered to meet such an ambitious reduction in account.

It is an ambitious reduction.

And as part of the November plan peg, we entered into an attrition plan.

With OMV, which meant not only did we give up vacancies, but we gave up future vacancies that if there's attrition, that line will go towards the that's, of course, a concern to any agency with the numbers that you mentioned.

But we've had open discussions with OMB where if a position has been vacated where it is a critical operations issue, critical operations position, where losing that line is going to derail everything.

Then we've been able to engage with OMB of okay.

You you need to let us fill backfill this line.

We can put this one towards the peg and we've reviewed those with OMB.

OMB has scrutinized them, and they've given us the green light on some of these to go ahead and hire people where even though we have a nutrition plan, we've been giving permission to backfill when we've demonstrated that it's a critical need.

That's very important to us.

So you are expecting to comply with the 11% headcount reduction and have a 396 headcount by FY Twenty thought.

It's what we put in as part of the peg.

It's what we've committed to doing.

What's the current headcount today?

What's the current head down today?

We're at about 3.

That.

So around 445.

Yeah.

Okay.

So I I just mean to say we're over the FY 24 budgeted headcount.

That's a 50% reduction essentially over the next 3 to starting in 3 months.

I don't understand.

I mean, I'm I'm not a I don't know your workforce intimately, but 1 out of 9 people disappearing the attrition in the next few months seems unlikely.

So I just wanna reiterate my question.

You expect to reach this massive headcount reduction goal in in this very short time frame?

We ultimately expect to reach it The timing of it does depend on attrition.

And if we get to a point where those numbers have not been met by the start of the the next fiscal cycle, we will have to have a conversation with ONB about that.

Okay.

I mean, I just I have to say, we're already seeing hearing time resolution go up.

We're already seeing trial time resolution go up because of the significant increase in the number of cases that are going your way.

How you could possibly manage a double digit percent reduction in your workforce and not have an enormous impact on being able to manage this caseload seems impossible.

So I don't understand what OMB is thinking.

I don't understand the analysis here.

It makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Yeah.

There's not a question there.

It's just a statement of being utterly confused at what they're doing.

I wanna just touch touch on another topic and then pass it over to my colleagues.

As you know, I'm very, very concerned about the significant increase in summons that had been issued since mayor Adams came into office.

60% increase across the board.

Can you break down for us which agencies are responsible for the greatest increase in summons issued during mayor Adams tenure or year over year if that's an easier dataset to utilize?

Yeah.

Just one moment, please.

So if we if we do consider year over year, I can I can give you a comparison for certain agencies with respect to someone's issuance as to fiscal year 24 versus fiscal year 23 or fiscal year 24 versus fiscal year 22 or 21?

21 would be great.

It's crazy.

Right.

So 21, the largest increase let me just line up my numbers here.

One moment.

The greatest increase that we've seen it owes now the the numbers I'm looking at cover the majority of agencies.

We have different datasets because of different systems.

So what I'm reading to you is likely leaving out TLC and d and some DOH MH.

But if you put those aside and we talk about the rest of the remaining enforcement agencies, The police department's issuing rate issuance rate has gone up the the volume of of what we've seen with the police department fiscal year to date.

Has been it is 41779.

That is a 287% increase from the 2887.

Yeah.

287.

That's a 287% increase from the same period fiscal year to date in fiscal year 2021.

Okay.

And is that the largest agency increase?

Oh, I'm sorry.

I missed one.

The DEP has a year to date total this year, this fiscal year issuance 50,000 216, that represents a391% increase in issuance with summons is filed with oath as compared to fiscal 2021 year to date.

And then the largest is come in.

Those would be the two numbers that I I would put in the you know, triple digits in terms of increases since 2021.

Okay.

That is very helpful.

We appreciate you providing that data.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Health.

Health.

For the category of health that we do track, it's a 340% increase.

And what category is that just for

our Oh, so so d o h m h, within the data I'm looking at, certain summons that they certain summonses that they issue our captured in this dataset and certain or not.

With the ones that are captured in this dataset, it's a 340% increase.

The total number year to date is 28,600 12.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

We would love if you would be amenable to submit this for the record so that we can just look at the agency by agency breakdown.

Sure.

And how that's evolved over time.

You know, it is it's clear that there's been a deliberate policy decision by this administration that's led to 300% and 400% increases of summons that are issued I'm just wondering a couple related questions.

Do you track the dismissal rates by agency, by type of violation, that information that you share back with agency heads to try to offer some guidance on violations that are not effectual?

We do have a dismissal report that is sent out to agencies.

It is not sent for with any instructions on what they should do with it.

Is information that we have and information that we provide.

And the dismissal report has not percentages, it has gross numbers, of number of dismissals in a given period.

So I have a month by month numbers.

What it does track.

It does not track the type of summonses.

Well, if you're talking about an agency, if you're talking about DEP, it doesn't say the type of DEP summonses letter dismissed, rather it says the basis for the dismissal.

Some are dismissed because it was improperly filed.

Some are dismissed because on the merits, it was dismissed.

The a the the hearing officer said, no, I disagree ultimately on the merits.

Some are dismissed because they actually don't come to, oh, there's a jurisdictional issue.

They're filed with us, but they're they shouldn't have been filed with us.

So it breaks down those categories.

Okay.

And do you also track that information by the city employee?

Of if, let's just say, sanitation officer x or police officer y was responsible for issuing 700 summons in the last year, do you track their individual dismissal rates at that level?

We don't.

We track, as I mentioned, by agency and within the agency, the basis for the dismissal.

And can you advise which agency has the highest dismissal rate at this time?

One moment.

So As I mentioned, the dismissals are that we have in our dismissal report are gross numbers.

So I'd need to know the percentages of the total body to to know of this missile rate But from a rough review, NYPD's dismissal rate is on the higher side.

And one reason we know that is because one of the reports that we that we run, that we provide to the council is our CGRA report, the criminal justice reform act report.

And if you review the CGRA report, For example, I'm looking at our quarterly report from the last quarter of the calendar year 2023.

And it it shows that of the slightly more than 15,000 CGA Sumances that were issued more than, you know, between 40 1 43% of those.

Were dismissed by NYPD.

Okay.

You know, we found when we reviewed local law 64 of 2015 that required oath at that time to report on dismissal rates, the PD had a dismissal rate of about 30%.

So it's just concerning to hear that that has gone up as the number of as a percentage, both as a total number, of course, as the number of summons issued by the police department has increased dramatically as well.

Yeah.

I should briefly qualify just the technical note.

CGRA's stomachs can also be issued by the parts department.

I believe that the majority that are fall into the data I'm reading are NYPD.

So but I just wanted to add that qualification.

That is helpful.

Yeah.

Last question for me for the moment.

I'll kick it to a council member brewer.

Do you track the demographics of the individuals of individuals that receive summons?

Do you have information on race, gender, even income level of the recipients of these summons?

We don't.

That information we we captured the information that is on the summons itself And so you'll have you'll have names, addresses, sometimes these are business names and not kind of natural persons.

Nor do we gather any of that information for people who who come in.

And we couldn't since the majority of them are doing it by telephone.

I think you'd find the same response from many tribunals around the country that the individual demographics of the the the folks who appear at the tribunals is not captured.

And then there's an issue of geography.

You know, some instances are issued across the five boroughs but we don't track geographic data because we find that sometimes the geographic data itself is faulty.

You know, when inspectors are in the field and they write down a ZIP code.

It may be an incorrect ZIP code.

It may be a ZIP code that falls outside the Five boroughs.

So so we don't feel like the the data regarding geography is something we can rely upon to know, like, what is the geographic makeup of where these summonses are issued, I'd refer you to the enforcement agencies who may have more reliable information on where they do their issuance.

Look, I I certainly wouldn't expect that that's perfect data.

I appreciate that there are faulty elements to it, but it's the best we've got.

And in a world in which we don't have more demographic information, about who are the recipients of these summons, addresses tell us a lot.

If we know people live in Brownsville versus the Upper West Side or you know, South Shore versus Brooklyn Heights, it tells us an important story.

And so, you know, I do hope that we can work together to better understand the residential data of who are receiving these summons because it sounds like that's the most viable way for us to to make some assumptions about race and about income if we don't have access to that date at this time.

We'd be happy to follow-up with the about that.

And if if my statement regarding demographic data, you know, was an overstatement.

I go back to the office and someone explains that there's a subcategory of certain summonses from certain agencies that do capture that.

We'll look into whether that's something we actually record in our systems.

I'm not sure if it is, but the summonses are generated by the agencies.

And so if some of that is captured, I don't wanna misspeak on

that.

Sure.

Yeah.

Council member Brewer.

Thank you.

We do love John Castello.

Just want you to know for the record.

John does great work for Otheon for the city.

Yes.

He does.

So just so you know, I am captured in your data because in 1994 when I was renovating where I live, I filled out some freaking paper incorrectly.

So in 2023, 2 buildings department, people showed up at my house.

To say I had filled it out incorrectly.

I still don't know what I filled out incorrectly, and we didn't have a CFO.

So anyway, I paid a very nice fine to oath.

And we are still trying to get the CFO.

So I just wanna say thank you.

It was handled very nicely.

I can't remember the name of the Walmart.

We did put down all of our Upper West Side data, however, just so you know.

So a good experience.

I'm gonna have to

give you freaking money, but good experience.

My question is twofold.

First of all, the revenue generator.

You are revenue generating agency.

So I thought that under the scenario with OMB, when you are a revenue generating agencies, you're less likely to get pegs.

Is that incorrect less likely to get caught, you certainly are revenue generating agency.

We or or the agencies are revenue generators, and you're just a trial.

I don't necessarily prefer the title revenue generating, and here's why.

Tribunal should not be associated with revenue.

Because then that makes it seem like we are impartial we're not that we are impartial towards Mainly, outcomes that would lead to to revenue.

And then we've seen problems with that type of model across the country.

That being said, we understand that people come to oath.

And we want, as a city, want to make sure that people have multiple ways to pay.

So can people pay at oath?

Yes.

They can.

And so there is revenue that passes through our doors that then goes into the city coffers.

So in that regard, we are part of the revenue system, so to speak.

But I forgot your question.

I'm so sorry.

No.

That that's part of it.

But the issue for me too is, as a result, since you are revving parent, you shouldn't get cut.

Yeah.

And

I That's what's in the in the clouds.

That's absolutely.

I would I would take that position.

And I when we for example, as I mentioned earlier, have positions that we're losing due to attrition that

or revenue generator

that are mission critical because maybe it's an adjudicator or fall into the category of positions that can support the city's coffers.

We blaining that to OMB, and they are receptive to those those that information when we share it about needing to to fill a line because it ultimately will it'll help the city's Okay.

I mean, I would agree with the chair since you have been cut so much.

That seems to me that it should be just a way of doing business not to cut, but that's another story.

I am kind of She got

that for the record that she agrees with the chair.

Yeah.

From once, now often.

The uncollected dollars.

Yeah.

When I asked I'd be able to look at it a year ago was 2,100,000,000, or that's a big number.

Carter cases.

So that's what I think lit is what DOE is put on your plate.

Is that correct?

Wouldn't say that DOE put it on our plate.

I would say that we took it upon ourselves working with the DOE and the state education department.

And we

I think, miss Liz Volatic, for whom I have great respect put it on your plate, that would be my this definition.

But go ahead.

Well, what's the question, counsel?

The

question is, how is it going?

Because guess what the number one issue of money in the city of New York and I have many friends who are before you and they want their kids and they deserve to get the best education possible, but they spend a lot of time with you and their cost in the city of fortune.

Now why in hell's name DOE doesn't build schools that would address the concerns?