NYC Has New Bosses—But is it the Same Old Song and Dance?
New York City Council Member Chris Marte and municipal retirees called on former Mayor Eric Adams to support Intro. 1096 back in September. There may be a new mayor, but the fight for 1096 and a more democratic City Council continues. Photo/Joe Maniscalco
By Joe Maniscalco
The New York City Council is a small but powerful fiefdom where bills benefiting ordinary working class people live and die according to the dictates of just one person—the Speaker.
Or at least that’s the way it used to be under former City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams’ rule.
Earlier this week, New York City home care workers forced to work round-the-clock shifts at roughly half the pay got a hearing on their long-languishing bill meant to finally end what the bill’s sponsor Chris Marte [D-1st District] and many others call “modern day slavery.”
Intro. 303 is the latest iteration of the aptly-named “No More 24” bill—and Wednesday’s Civil Service and Labor Committee hearing held at 250 Broadway might also signal the end to unwritten City Council “protocol” precluding committee chairs from holding hearings on bills that the Speaker just doesn’t like.
Council Member Marte expressed his hope that’s actually the case when Work-Bites asked him about the status of that unwritten City Council “protocol” at Wednesday’s “No More 24” press conference outside the gates of City Hall.
“I’m extremely optimistic that things have changed under this new speaker, and will continue to progress in the right way to make sure that workers are represented and fought for as well.”
“I’m extremely optimistic that things have changed under this new Speaker, and will continue to progress in the right way to make sure that workers are represented and fought for as well,” Council Member Marte said.
Council Member Marte had made an unsuccessful bid to succeed Adams as Speaker running on a 26-point reform platform focusing on increasing transparency and decreasing the autocratic power of the Speaker’s office. But the post ultimately went to Council Member Julie Menin [D-5th District].
“Together, we will forge a new City Council that takes a more forceful and proactive approach to New York’s shared goals,” Menin said in January after officially capturing the post.
Work-Bites reached out to Speaker Menin this week to get her thoughts on the unwritten “protocol” her predecessor used to bottle up bills in committee that she opposed—most notably the “No More 24” bill and Intro. 1096—the bill to protect New York City municipal retirees from being stripped of the traditional Medicare coverage and city supplement they earned on the job. So far, however, those efforts have been unsuccessful.
Former Civil Service and Labor Committee Chair Carmen De La Rosa [D-10th District] used the existence of that unwritten City Council “protocol” as justification for actively suppressing Intro. 1099—an earlier version of Intro. 1096 and efforts to protect municipal retirees from privatization and the Medicare Advantage push.
“A request for a hearing [on Intro. 1099] came to our office and we passed that request onto the Speaker’s Office,” Council Member De La Rosa told Work-Bites following a Civil Service and Labor Committee oversight hearing on “The Future of Municipal Work” held on Sept. 26, 2023. “That’s the protocol.”
Former City Council Member Charles Barron—then sponsor of Intro. 1099—called the rationale for refusing to give the retiree bill a hearing both “absurd” and “ridiculous.”
“[Council Member De La Rosa] does not need the approval of the Speaker,” Council Member Barron told Work-Bites. “[And] no council member that wants to sign onto my bill—and I know for sure some of them wanted to sign on but they were told that they had to check in with the Speaker—this is a violation of democracy. It's a violation of our council rules. It's a violation of the policies of the New York City Council.”
Former Mayor Eric Adams ultimately decided to drop the Medicare Advantage push before being voted out of office last year. The threat to municipal retiree healthcare remains, however, and Intro. 1096 continues to languish in committee without a hearing.
Current New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is on record opposing the Medicare Advantage push—but has steadfastly refused to support Intro. 1096 or even engage with its supporters and advocates.
The new mayor further stoked retiree anger and anxiety this week when, according to the New York Times, he proposed “drawing $229 million down from the city’s Retiree Health Benefits Trust for the upcoming fiscal year.”
"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss," Council of Municipal Retiree Organizations (COMRO) President Stu Eber told Work-Bites in response to Mayor Mamdani’s proposal. "Eric Adams campaigned on rejecting Medicare Advantage, then let his budget office bamboozle him and the MLC into doubling down on depriving retirees of the Medicare coverage we were promised in order to pay for raises and supplementing union welfare funds. Outgoing Comptroller Brad Lander documented the sacking of the Health Insurance Stabilization Fund, whose intended purpose was balancing premium rates. Now, Mayor Mamdani is proposing to deplete our Trust to close the budget gap. This smells like the budget office continues to disregard the health and economic security of one of the City's most vulnerable populations.”
Eber further pointed out that more than 20,000 New York City municipal retirees are living at or below poverty levels with minimal pensions and Social Security benefits.
“Raiding the RHBT can only further the affordability crisis for people who worked for decades serving the people of New York,” he added. “We ‘won't get fooled again,’ and hope that Comptroller Levine and Speaker Menin will let the Mayor know they won't stand for this attack on the retirees.”
Council Member Marte, meanwhile, further told Work-Bites on Wednesday that he plans on reintroducing Intro. 1096.
“We’re going to keep having those conversations,” he said. “We have to reintroduce [1096]. We reintroduced [the ‘No More 24’] bill because we didn’t have to make any changes to it. With 1096, we’ve been working to make amendments. So, hopefully, we’ll be able to reintroduce it in the next stated [City Council Meeting], or the following one after that.”