[music]

Announcer: Listener-supported WNYC Studios.

[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. Coming up later in the show, our third and final session with Jenée Desmond-Harris aka Dear Prudence from Slate. We'll do one more session of reading letters, asking for advice that people wrote in, and doing our best to offer some advice, and one more time, we'll crowdsource the advice. Listeners, if you're someone who likes to give advice, be ready to tune in later in the show during our second hour for one more round with Dear Prudence, real name Jenée Desmond-Harris from Slate's column and podcast called Dear Prudence. That's coming up.

We begin today with one of the most consequential questions facing New York City and the whole area right now, really the whole state and really the whole nation and really our whole Western Hemisphere. Who is responsible for sheltering the nearly 60,000 recently arrived migrants currently under the City's care? There are about 100,000 who have arrived altogether to the New York City area in the last year or so. It's about 60,000 currently being housed by the City or other places around here.

If you're following the news much these days, you're seeing all these Democratic Party leaders at odds with each other like a game of hot potato, "You're responsible more for this." "No, you're responsible more." Mayor Adams, Governor Hochul, President Biden, how do we solve it? It's a question so urgent and fraught that the Biden administration, did hear this point yet, sent letters this week to Mayor Eric Adams and Governor Kathy Hochul pointing to "structural and operational issues," in the City's response to the crisis and offering about two dozen recommendations to strengthen its migrant operations.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas penned a letter about a month after Mayor Adams met with Mayorkas in Washington to ask for help from him, from the federal government, and days after Governor Hochul said this.

Governor Hochul: What we've said all along is just let them work and help us out financially.

Brian Lehrer: The Governor also said this.

Governor Hochul: This crisis originated with the federal government and it must be resolved through the federal government.

Brian Lehrer: Both Hochul and Adams have urged the Biden administration to fast-track work permits for migrants and step up aggressively in other ways here, too, and yet Mayorkas put it back on them. Adams' and Hochul's heads must be exploding. It made news last week that Governor Hochul accuse the City of being slow, disorganized, and counterproductive in its response to the migrants. There's tension between Albany and City Hall, too, after all the work that Adams and Hochul had been doing to protect unity.

Remember that? After the era of Mayor de Blasio and Governor Cuomo's relationship was so dysfunctional.

They were like, "Hey, here we are, we're buddies, we're different from that." Well, not as much as before. We will get into these stories, and time-permitting, at least one other big question facing the City right now. What's next for Rikers Island? As another new story this week is Mayor Adams urging city council to come up with a new plan to close the City's troubled jail complex. He says, "The one to close it by 2027 won't work." We'll get into why.

Joining me now, Elizabeth Kim, Gothamist and WNYC reporter covering Mayor Adams, and Jeff Coltin, Politico reporter and co-author of Politico's daily morning newsletter, The New York Playbook. Hi, Liz. Hi, Jeff. Great to have you both on the show.

Elizabeth Kim: Morning, Brian.

Jeff Coltin: Thank you so much.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, we can take your calls on the finger-pointing over the migrant crisis here in New York City and the responsibility of the City, state, and federal governments. I said we're going to do advice later in the show with Jenée Desmond-Harris. How about some advice here, can you solve this problem? Who should do what about sheltering recent migrants who don't have housing when they get here? If we assume, I know it's a big 'if', if we assume Mayor Adams, Governor Hochul, President Biden, and Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas are all people acting in good faith here. People of goodwill trying to actually do the right thing on some level but not wanting to take it all on themselves or not being able to take it all on their jurisdictions.

Give us your advice. Give them your advice. What is the solution? This is not about closing the borders or opening the borders to whatever degree. This is about 60,000 people who are already here. Who should do what? 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or your questions for our guests. You can also text to our number or tweet @BrianLehrer.

Liz, I wonder if you'd go into some of the specific concerns of the Biden administration over the City's handling of the migrant crisis as outlined in Secretary Mayorkas' letter, maybe pick one or two or three, what were they telling the City with a little bit of finger-wagging, "You can do this better," about?

Elizabeth Kim: What's interesting about the letter is that it ticks off several areas in which they feel that the City could stand to improve its handling of the crisis but it doesn't lay out any specific proposals. Now, there may be more to that that we don't know because the letter did say that the team was going to give the City and state a briefing. It may be that they held those specific proposals for the briefing, but what we know from the letter is, they cite things like information flow, data management, case management, and day-to-day operations.

These are all things that I think that have-- previously, there have been criticisms of the way, for example, data has been collected and how transparent the administration has been with its data. Day-to-day operations, there have been questions about a contractor that the City hired and there's even an investigation into whether there was improper handling and treatment of migrants by this specific contractor. That's what we know so far.

Brian Lehrer: Jeff, what's your take on that letter from Mayorkas?

Jeff Coltin: Look, Mayor Adams is probably a bit embarrassed about it. He is somebody who always talks about management, about efficiency. He worked on the NYPD CompStat back in the 1990s as a police officer and he's always talking about bringing that spirit to City government. We haven't actually seen that happen, that's maybe just talk, but yes, the fact that the White House was basically saying, "Oh, you're asking us for help, we'll get your own house in order first."

Now, that said, look, the Mayor has made no secret of the City's serious struggles to house and to serve what's been about 100,000 migrants coming into New York City in the past year. It's not like the Mayor has been claiming that the City's been doing a great job. I think at every turn, he's been saying, "We are struggling and that's why we need help." This was quite interesting having the White House response to City Hall, because previously, we've mostly been hearing it go one direction with the City and more recently Governor Hochul as well, they're talking to the White House saying, "Please, we need money. We need expedited work permits primarily. Let's let people work." The White House has been pretty quiet on that.

Now, this was a big response, almost sounding fed up, saying, "Get your own house in order before you ask us for help."

Brian Lehrer: Before you ask us for help. Why not at the same time? Here's a question from a listener via text. "Jeff, I'll stay with you for this. Has the administration--" actually, Liz, let me give this to you. "Has the administration officially responded to the request to speed up the ability to work legally?"

I think the background here is you have to have six months of residency in the country under an asylum request before you can have a work permit. The City is saying, "Why six months? They're here seeking asylum. They've registered as asylum seekers. They can get on their own feet more quickly under this legal status and support themselves and we don't have to find so many shelter beds and put up tent cities and everything else as quickly. Why not give them work authorization more quickly?"

Besides throwing it back on the City for other things that the City may not be doing as well as it could, Liz, has the federal government said, "Why or why not faster work permits?"

Elizabeth Kim: Well, the letter did address that, and what it said was that when it comes to work authorizations, that it has, "statutory constraints." Basically, what you can read into that is that there are laws around the waiting day period. There are laws around that. In order for the administration to get around that, that they would likely need approval from Congress. Now, yesterday, the Governor went down to DC to meet with someone at the White House, the Chief of staff, Jeff Zients, to talk about this. Out of that meeting, she says that the White House has agreed to speed up the process, but it's not speaking to the waiting period that you've mentioned. They were talking about things like, "We can do things in which we can let more migrants know about this application process. We can send you more personnel to help migrants apply for work authorizations." It's nuanced.

The White House is saying, "We can do things to help speed up the process," but they're not really speaking to the 180-day waiting period. Now, there's another way in which the White House can also speed up the process that would allow migrants to legally work, and that's extending temporary protected status to migrants. That is another issue that the White House has not addressed. Currently, what it means is this is a status that is granted to migrants who are fleeing civil unrest, natural disasters, and it would allow migrants to work legally and also apply for permanent status. Currently, it applies to around 16 countries, but that's an open question that the Biden administration has not answered.

Brian Lehrer: Like after the earthquake in Haiti, Haitians who were here got temporary protected status, because it was seen as too daunting to go back. People from El Salvador, I think, after the political and natural disaster crises there, got temporary protected status. So many of this--

Elizabeth Kim: Ukraine is another example, too.

Brian Lehrer: Good example right now, and so many of the asylum seekers are saying they're looking for asylum because of these political or other extreme situations in their countries. Jeff, let me ask you about this text that came in from another listener just now, because you cover Albany more. This one says on the work permits, "Governor Hochul should start issuing work permits at the state level herself and not wait for the federal government," and the listener texts, "The state legalized marijuana, for example, without waiting for the feds?"

Jeff Coltin: That's an interesting theory. I do not know if that would legally stand, if the state would be able to grant work permits to asylum seekers that would keep them legally protected. That's interesting. I guess more context around this is that, yes, the state, the City government, they want the migrants to be able to legally work so that they can make money and get out of City care to be able to rent their own apartments and just, basically, "Become New Yorkers." Just get out of this the status of asylum-seeking migrant who currently is homeless and reliant on the government to just doing their own thing.

However, a lot of folks are already doing that by working under the table. It's not a secret that there are a lot of migrants who are working without status, being paid cash under the table. I'm sure many of them are happy to be even doing that. Of course, that raises other issues of it's very easy to be abused then, to not be protected by laws, not be paid enough, you have no legal protections. That's not a good long-term situation. That said, even if many migrants don't have legal work status, doesn't mean that they're not working, and in a way, I guess, Hochul is giving them this, but I don't think the state is going after these folks. I don't believe that the state or City governments are working to prosecute migrants that are working without work permits.

Brian Lehrer: Working off the books. Here's an interesting one, Liz, from a listener via text message, says, "Recommendation to the City, give migrants a fifth of the money they claim to be spending on supporting them." The listener goes on, "How has no news organization done the simple calculation of $1.7 billion divided by 100,000 migrants, equals $17,000 per migrant. Give the migrants a few thousand dollars and send them on their way. They're resourceful, they want to work and make a life for themselves." Have you ever heard that one before?

Elizabeth Kim: No, but the City does sit down with migrants and ask them, what is their plan? For those that may have some connections outside the City, perhaps in Florida or any other state, the City will pay for a flight or a bus for them to travel there. I think we also need to keep in mind that it's really expensive to live in New York City. I don't know that just divvying up all of the aid and handing a check to each migrant would even be sufficient. Also, it's beyond housing. There are other services that migrants need as well.

Brian Lehrer: Here's another text. Our lines are full, too, and we'll get to some calls, but the texts are flowing in with some interesting things. Jeff, "There's no rights, Governors and or Mayors should meet with officials in other states that may be willing to welcome migrants for particular needs other states may have." I think they've been trying to do that and not finding a lot of receptivity, yes?

Jeff Coltin: Yes, that's my understanding here. There's an interesting conundrum here where it's absolutely true, especially last year, that Texas Governor Greg Abbott was putting migrants on busses and sending them to New York, many of which somewhat coerced, not everybody was completely wanting to or choosing to go to New York, but they were being sent there. I don't have the exact numbers, but to my understanding, that is a small portion of the migrants that are in New York.

Most of the folks that have come to New York in the past year are explicitly choosing to come to New York because it's a sanctuary City, because they know that services are provided, and probably most of all, because we have a thriving international community here and many people from whatever country you come from in the world, you can find a community of your people, whether it's your own relatives or just friends or people from your town in Ecuador or Venezuela or Haiti, there's a community here in New York. Of course, a lot of people are saying, "Yes, let's send them somewhere else, either, "For their own good or just this idea of let's get them out of here."

These are people that are, many of them, choosing to be in New York and want to be in New York.

Brian Lehrer: Right. Here's a related question, I think, or suggestion from Marvin in Brooklyn calling in. Marvin, you're on WNYC. Hi, there.

Marvin: Hi. Thank you for all that you do, and thank you for having such a great staff. I think that an important thing to do is to nationalize the issue. As a very progressive New Yorker, I think we also need to be helping border states who are dealing with the influx of migrants. Perhaps, we could use this crisis as an opportunity to finally break the log jam over the comprehensive immigration reform and also giving full citizenship to the Dreamers.

Brian Lehrer: Marvin, thank you. I think that probably this is making it politically harder to do that. Democrats and Republicans are running to their corners. The Republicans, even more than ever, saying, "Look, there are more people coming in than Biden even wants to be coming in. We don't have control over the borders. That's the first thing we have to do." They're not ready for comprehensive immigration reform on the right, that's for sure.

Liz, on this notion of nationalizing it, I guess despite what Jeff just said about a lot of the migrants wanting to be here because this is where there's a real international metro area with people from the countries that they're coming from, one could make a theoretical case to nationalize the issue and that the federal government says, "Yes, there is a surge of people seeking asylum right now because of conditions in other countries, mostly in this hemisphere, but New York, as Mayor Adams or somebody said recently, is full. They can't find the beds. They're setting up tents. They're using parks. All these things. Besides the fact that it's contentious for local communities, it's just hard to find the space. Okay, yes, we will take in all the asylum seekers who are seeking asylum, but we have to have some rational distribution of where people go at first, until they get their feet on the ground in this country." Do you think anybody in Washington is thinking like that, or is that politically impossible or considered too mean to the migrants who then get some individual choice taken away from them?

Elizabeth Kim: I think that is politically challenging for the Biden administration, but that is precisely the argument that the Mayor has been making since last year. He's referred to it as a decompression strategy. We need a decompression strategy at the border, and that migrants need to be, not that they should not be coming to New York, but we need to look into other places that can accept migrants.

Now, it's true, migrants are coming to New York because it is an international city, because there are work opportunities. Another overarching reason is because of the Right-to-Shelter law, which obligates the City to provide a bed to anyone who seeks it. Now, the City does this in part because it is the right thing to do. New York is a progressive City. At the same time, I think it's important to point out that because of these rules, the City legally is obligated to do this.

We saw a few weeks ago when the City did not do it, when we saw migrants actually sleeping outside on the City sidewalks because the City said they had run out of room, that the Legal Aid Society brought them to court and said, "You are breaking the Right-to-Shelter law." I think that that's really important. This is the underpinning foundation of why migrants want to come to New York because they know that they have certain rights. Families, for example, they will receive a hotel room because they're not supposed to be in a congregate shelter. They know that there's, that there's education, there's medical services here.

Brian Lehrer: Jeff, in your Politico Playbook newsletter that dropped last Friday, one of the lines was, "In her speech, Hochul reiterated her belief that the legal responsibility to shelter those in need stops at the City's borders." Jeff, help us understand what the Governor says is the City's responsibility here. I think there was a court ruling this summer that said, "Hey, you know, Governor Hochul, this Right-to-Shelter actually pertains to the state."

Jeff Coltin: Yes. It's an interesting case. This Right-to-Shelter, which is applied in New York City due to a court case for the past 43 years, I think since about 1980, its legal reasoning is based on the state constitution, which says that the care of people is the responsibility of the state. This was legally applied to the City, but yes, there is a legal rationale that it should apply to people anywhere in the state, and that anybody who goes to basically any government, any municipality or says, "I need shelter," should be provided that. That has not legally been the case because nobody, as far as I know, that basically hasn't been litigated in that way. Right now, the Coalition for the Homeless and the Legal Aid Society are in the midst of legal conversations, discussions with a judge to possibly make the Right-to-Shelter go statewide, if I'm understanding the back and forth correctly. It's legally complicated.

Brian Lehrer: Liz, you wrote this up on Gothamist and reported it on the radio side. Does the court say, even though the Right-to-Shelter is always talked about as a New York City policy, it's actually a New York State policy under old court rulings. Somebody could show up in Albany, somebody could show up in Buffalo, somebody could show up in Scarsdale, somebody could show up in Huntington and say, "There's a Right-to-Shelter. That's in the law. Come forward with it."

Elizabeth Kim: What's interesting is that they haven't gotten there quite yet. Basically, what the judge said was that the state has a responsibility to take a larger role in the crisis. As to the question of whether Right-to-Shelter should be applied statewide, that as of now has not been part of the conversations. I think there are questions that Legal Aid is constantly pressed on this is because it makes sense that Legal Aid has for decades protected the Right-to-Shelter in New York City. It makes sense, why don't you just, since it's based-- the argument is that if it's based in the state constitution, why not just make that argument before a judge and ask her to decide on it? Legal Aid has basically said that what they're concerned about are the practicalities and also the present moment.

"We have clients in New York City. We want to ensure that they have beds, and that we'll cross that bridge when we get there if we need to." The interesting thing about this is that it's not just Legal Aid who could file this motion before a judge. It's also the City. The City has standing to do this as well. That's what I think me and other people who are closely following this case, looking to see how does the City manage this? When you put the question to them, what they'll often say is, "We're looking at all of our legal options." That would definitely bring them tremendous leverage with the Hochul administration because there's no guarantee that the City would win a case like that. You can see, especially when you talk to the advocates, that they have a very good case.

If you look at how Right-to-Shelter was won in New York City before a judge, and the state at the time was a party to those proceedings and the consent decree, you easily can make that next leap and say, "Wow, well, if this is based on the state constitution, which says that the care and support of the needy are "public concerns", there's no reason why this shouldn't apply state-wide." I don't know that the administration is ready to pursue that option, in part because of political reasons. That would be pretty politically devastating for Kathy Hochul.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, if you're just joining us, we're talking about Mayor Adams, Governor Hochul, and the Biden administration all going back and forth, even though they're all Democrats who say they're all supportive of each other's policies and values, all going back and forth, pointing fingers, trying to play a game of hot potato with the 60,000 or so recently arrived asylum seekers who don't have a place to live, and how and where and at whose expense to shelter them, with our reporter, Elizabeth Kim and Jeff Coltin from Politico, New York. Adrian in Bushwick. You're on WNYC. Hi, Adrian.

Adrian: Hi. I just wanted to throw in there that it is all true. It's difficult and it's political, but in your discussions, everybody keeps talking about this right-to-shelter law, which is the issue, obviously. For years, and I came here in the '80s as an immigrant, everybody always said you always will come back to New York. I never knew anything about shelter laws. It's just because this is actually the only town in which you can go miles and miles with public transportation to get two jobs if you get one off the books, on the books. Because I, at the time, made the mistake going to LA and I had to realize, "Gee, you need a car. This is terrible." I also came, so all I'm saying is a lot of people come here simply for the opportunity to work and the ability to get around great distances easily, which you can't really do anywhere else.

Brian Lehrer: It's a great point.

Adrian: I just want to put this in there instead of always this political thing. That's why people also stay here a lot. Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you, Adrian. Thank you. It's a good thought. Also reminds us that in addition to these 60,000, which is the number that's being used, who need shelter, who've arrived in the last year or so in New York, there are another 40,000 or so who don't, who have had places to say that they found on their own or ways to support them that they found on their own. Probably, many of them do not own cars and can make it because of the reason Adrian says, public transportation in New York City. It's such a thing, I know this is an aside, Jeff, but I saw a stat a few years ago and I think I'm remembering right that the New York metro area, this is before the pandemic, but the New York Metro area has about a quarter to a third of all the mass transit commuters to work in the country.

Jeff Coltin: Oh my gosh. New York, it's a behemoth compared to anywhere else. Technically, Los Angeles has a subway system, but it's not a part of the City's DNA in the way that is in New York. Yes, of course, I agree with our caller that going to Los Angeles is absolutely a mistake for himself, for anybody. You've got to be in New York here. I'll also add, the Right-to-Shelter is a part of that. Los Angeles has many more people living in tents outside.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, and on street corners, because the weather is more amenable to it year-round. They don't have a Right-to-Shelter. We hear about San Francisco in this respect too, talking about California. Just many more people sleeping outside, and they're having a different debate about homelessness than we are. Joel in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. In Manhattan, but calling about Staten Island, right, Joel?

Joel: Yes. Good morning. Thank you. I wanted to ask a question about the interview that I heard yesterday on WNYC with the Staten Island Borough President, who was explaining his opposition to relocating migrants in the Borough and saying that it was diverting funds from other things or implying that it was diverting funds from other things that the Borough needed, such as parks and a performing arts school. That sounds like a very reasonable argument that, why are we spending money on these migrants who are here only two weeks but not spending it on the people who live here? I'm wondering if that's a legitimate argument. Is that the case that money is being taken away from school building and so forth?

Brian Lehrer: I didn't hear that interview but the Staten Island Borough President is Vito Fossella. I think his ancestors, but I don't know in what generation, came from Italy. I wonder what his ancestors would've said if people said, "Why is the government spending so much to settle all these Italians who are coming in through Ellis Island rather than on the people who are already here who could get more services?" Liz, did you hear that interview? I did not.

Elizabeth Kim: I looked briefly at the transcript, and the crisis is costly. There's no way around that. The City has received over $1.5 billion from the state, and it expects to receive more, but it is costly. Even aside from the money, it's just sucked a lot of the City's policy focus and a lot of personnel. There are so many agencies that are now involved in the crisis. The DOE, for example. School is expected to start in less than ten days, and they are expecting around over 19,000 migrant children being enrolled. There's no question that that is the case and there's no way around that.

Brian Lehrer: Which brings us back to the original premise of this segment, which is that Albany and City Hall and Washington are all trying to literally pass the buck or not pass any bucks when the City says immigration is a national function, and yes, this is going to cost the City billions of dollars over the next several years, and this should be financially on the federal government, at least a lot more than it is, and they reject it. One more call, Tara in Queens, you're on WNYC. Hi, Tara.

Tara: Good morning.

Brian Lehrer: Good morning.

Tara: I was just calling because I heard an interview yesterday on channel one. A Republican politician, Nicole Malliotakis, she was talking like a lot of bad things that the immigrants that came here, half of them came illegally and they're not vetted. They're not vetted properly and stuff like that. They're criminals and they're bringing drugs into the country. My question is, I just want to know if that's true, what she was saying, or partially true?

Brian Lehrer: Tara, thank you, Jeff. Do we know? God, this hearkens back to Trump coming down the escalator, Trump Tower at the beginning of his presidential campaign in 2015, and talking about the Mexicans, "They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crimes. Well, some are good people." If that's what Congresswoman Malliotakis from Staten Island is, in effect, saying now, are there data? Do we know if recently arrived asylum seekers are committing any crime at any different rate than people already here?

Jeff Coltin: I do not have the statistics for that in particular, but I can say that broadly, yes, 100,000 new people are coming into New York and I'm sure that there are going to be some folks that commit crimes among 100,000 people. That said, of course, this is a classic racist talking point, one that has been used for generations against new immigrants. These folks are seeking legal status in the country. They are here with the knowledge and understanding under current United States law. Do I know the exact level of "vetting"? No. I don't. I don't know what level of vetting is expected.

Brian Lehrer: Well, vetting is hard, but this is one I want to follow up on, so we'll have to come back to it on another segment.

Elizabeth Kim: Brian, if I could just--

Brian Lehrer: If you know this, yes.

Elizabeth Kim: No, I just want to make this point that I think often gets lost, is that people talk about the immediate costs that are incurred by the City by this sudden influx. That is all true. The migrants are also themselves a form of human capital. Now, we all talked about how many New Yorkers left the City and state during the pandemic, and how we were worried that the City was losing population. We also had conversations about how difficult it was for restaurants to hire service workers for them. Now, we have an influx of people who are coming here, who want to work, who want to contribute to the economy, and in the long-term, we have to believe that many of them will.

How do we know that? It's based on the stories of immigrants today in New York, and many immigrants have stood up during this period to tell their stories of how they came here. They built a life for themselves. They built a business for themselves. They have children now who live here and are working. I think it's really important to remember that, not just in terms of, yes, the City has to pay for a temporary shelter, the City has to offer up resources in terms of City-owned facilities to house migrants, but I think there's a long-term benefit to people coming and wanting to work in New York City.

Brian Lehrer: It's a story that's hundreds of years old in New York, and it wasn't that long ago that the lead story about immigrants, if we're looking at a big sweep of history, is New York's economy keeps getting revived generation after generation because we keep having so many immigrants in comparison with a lot of the cities in the Rust Belt. Pick your one, in upstate New York, going west from there or even some cities in Massachusetts and New England, where people are leaving and not being replaced. Those cities are really in decline in a way that New York has not been in decline, speaking over a generations-long span of time because we keep being replenished by immigrants.

I'm glad you brought that up, Liz, because it's a central fact to remember, even as they figure out how to deal with the short-term expenses, the immediate expenses of somebody coming here needing shelter right now. We're going to take a short break and then we're going to do a short tag to this segment on what we always said was going to be our second topic with Liz and Jeff. That is the new tension this week between Mayor Adams and City Council over how to close Rikers Island. Then we have some other things coming up on the show today. We're going to look at how selective colleges are adjusting. There's some really interesting news on this front, adjusting to the Supreme Court decision, banning Affirmative Action based on race. We know new things that Columbia is doing and other colleges, even citing the Supreme Court decision explicitly in the applications that students are invited to fill out, and then we have Jenée Desmond-Harris, Dear Prudence from Slate, for one more round of our summer advice series. All coming up on the show. Stay with us.

[music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we finish up with City and State News with our Liz Kim and Jeff Coltin from Politico, New York, with a short tag to the long conversation that we just had about dealing with the asylum seekers. Jeff, the other Adams news that I wanted to touch on from this week has to do with his plea to City council to change the law that calls for closing the Rikers Island Jail Complex by 2027.

I guess the Mayor's issue here is that because of the increase in crime, and therefore the increase in people being jailed since the start of the pandemic, there are more people at Rikers than they thought there were going to be by now, making it harder to close the jail by 2027, because they won't have enough jail beds elsewhere as the law now says, 2027. Is that the Mayor's issue, Jeff?

Jeff Coltin: Yes. I'll say it's actually an interesting situation. Right now as we speak, the Mayor is at a rally at Foley Square for expanded work rights for asylum seekers. Then just around the corner at City Hall Park, a handful of progressives including the Public Advocate Jumaane Williams and Comptroller Brad Lander are holding a rally saying, "Close Rikers in 2027," there is no delay. These issues are really literally happening at the same time. Yes, I think you explained it well. The Mayor, his argument is that the jail population right now is too high to fit into the, I believe it's 3,300 jail beds that are planned for 2027.

If we close Rikers, the current plan is that there's going to be about 3000 jail beds. Well, currently the population of Rikers is 6,000, and the Mayor is basically saying, we need a plan B, and the City council and progressives they're saying, that's your problem. Let's find a way to keep the jail population lower.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. Liz, almost no community seems to want shelters for asylum seekers. No community seems to want the borough-based jails that are supposed to replace Rikers or the expansion of borough-based jails in some of the cases. Do you know how the rising costs of building the four borough-based jails, Staten Island gets away with that one in this scenario, but the four borough-based jails and what it costs to build or expand them has affected the feasibility of the current plan?

Elizabeth Kim: Well, what happens is the longer the City waits on breaking ground, the more it will cost. That's just the nature of construction costs, is you wait longer, it will cost you more. That's why many advocates have argued that the City should not delay closing Rikers and begin breaking ground on these new smaller jails and follow through with what is actually the law right now.

Brian Lehrer: Jeff, last question as we run out of time, what are the long-term implications of the closure of Rikers Island for the criminal justice system in New York City, and how can this be managed?

Jeff Coltin: Yes. Just to add there on Liz. I mean, a few of the borough-based jails are currently in the process of being built. I think the destruction of the jail in lower Manhattan, same for Brooklyn. This process is quietly and slowly happening while people are still incarcerated on Rikers Island. The long-term plan there is yes, there could hypothetically if this plan goes through, be many fewer jail beds which would mean many fewer people incarcerated at one time on Rikers Island, in New York City jails. One complication here, of course, is that this is not purely a City issue.

This is not something that Eric Adams can do completely on his own. This is also a big issue for the City's prosecutors, the district attorneys who are independent actors not reliant on the Mayor to possibly be sending fewer people to jail or be letting them out on bail. It's an interesting situation, and the ball is not entirely in Mayor Adams' court. This is the statewide issue.

Brian Lehrer: Right. There's a state-level bail reform. There's the backlash panic over the state-level bail reform. I guess I'll throw in a quick tag question here, Liz, if you know this was a request from the Mayor to the City council to change the law. Is he asking specifically to delay the date from 2027 to some other year in the future for closing Rikers, and has City council leadership responded?

Elizabeth Kim: The City, to my knowledge, the Mayor, to my knowledge has, and I asked the council about this, they have not received a proposal from the Mayor. Their answer to this is consistently, "This is the law, and we have not received anything formal in writing from the Mayor as to how he wants to change this proposal." He put this out there. He's always been a little bit cagey about the closure of Rikers, but it was this week when he said, the City council needs to take another look at it, but it's not quite so simple as in putting it in the council's court. If the Mayor truly wants to do this, then he has to initiate the change himself over what is the law.

Brian Lehrer: WNYC and Gothamist reporter Elizabeth Kim, and Jeff Coltin, Politico reporter and co-author of the Daily Morning Newsletter, New York Playbook. Thanks so much to you both.

Elizabeth Kim: Thanks, Brian.

Jeff Coltin: Thank you for having me on.

 

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

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