[music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. As last year ended, we concluded our year-long series 51 Council Members in 52 Weeks, which was to touch every neighborhood of New York City through its locally elected representative to government. Now for the new year, we will invite select council members as seems relevant to important issues of right now from time to time during the year. We will start with the council's Majority Leader Keith Powers, who has an important and very controversial new bill that you've probably heard about by now. Now, as hard as it is to find apartments in New York City, for a huge number of New Yorkers it's all but impossible. Why?

Many landlords won't even show units to those whose background checks show a criminal conviction. That exclusion impacts Black and Brown New Yorkers most. The Fair Chance for Housing Act is now under consideration by the city council, and would prohibit housing providers, with a few exceptions, from running criminal background checks on prospective tenants. Council Majority Leader Keith Powers, who represents District 4 in parts of Midtown and the Upper East Side is the sponsor of the proposed legislation, suffering the slings and arrows and he joins me now. Majority Leader Powers, happy New Year. Welcome back to the show.

Majority Leader Powers: Happy New Year. I think I was here just about a year ago talking about my district, so it's nice to be here again.

Brian Lehrer: I guess so. That's right. Since we went numerically as much as possible, and you're just in District 4.

Majority Leader Powers: That's right.

Brian Lehrer: Give everybody some background on how many people are impacted before we even debate the pros and cons. How many people are impacted by the current practice of running criminal background checks?

Majority Leader Powers: Thank you for asking that and happy New Year. There are nearly 750,000 New Yorkers right now who had a prior conviction. That's about 10% to 11% of the adult population in our city who are or can be impacted by this law because right now it doesn't matter whether it's a small or large offense. It doesn't matter when it happened. The ability remains for somebody to discriminate against you to find housing using these background checks.

Right now we have nearly 750,000 New Yorkers who are facing potential discrimination when they go to find a apartment, and it could be a decade ago, could have been 20 years ago when the offense happened. There's no restrictions on how it's used or how it could be used, I should say, and it's impacting a large adult part of our adult population in the city, by the way, alongside their families, who also, of course, are victims of the discrimination because of the household they're in.

Brian Lehrer: We'll take calls. We'll open up the phones on whether this is a good idea or a bad idea. Well, we'll do that now. 212-433-WNYC, just so you have the phone number. We'll get to your calls in a few minutes after we go through some of the basics and some of the arguments with Council Member Keith Powers. 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. If you're on any side of this personally, as somebody with a criminal conviction in your past who has faced discrimination in housing, or somebody who's a landlord, or even a potential neighbor who thinks that the landlord should have discretion in this area, 212-433-WNYC. If you want to weigh in or ask a question 212-433-9692 or tweet @BrianLehrer. Council Member, what does the bill do exactly? Maybe you should run everybody through some of the particulars here to say who's in, who's out, what are the exceptions, things like that.

Majority Leader Powers: Sure. I'll note that we just had a hearing on the bill a few weeks ago. Of course, from there, we take all the input, all the feedback, all the stakeholder conversations, and then we look at what's the next step and how to best address those concerns or comments, things like that. The bill essentially says that background checks which are found to be wildly inaccurate, and obviously widely used, and potentially discriminatory against individuals could no longer be used except for a few different ways that they could be used. In two family homes, where the family lives there, we're not requiring them. You can use the sex offender registry still.

There's still opportunity to use something like that which exists separate from the background check. Of course, there's still a lot of other tools here that they can use like the credit score, rental history, things like that. What we are seeing though is we are really, I think, in the early stages of a nationwide movement around these background checks. Just about a month or two ago, the federal government itself, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau put out a few reports that detail the widespread inaccuracies that are in the background checks, how they're being used inappropriately, inaccurately, and all the issues with that. We saw Oakland, I think a week or two ago, banned the entire use of them.

New Jersey's restricted them. We see Detroit, Seattle, other cities starting to restrict them as well because they are understanding that both the inaccuracies that are associated with them and also, of course, how it hurts people from finding housing. Our bill, as it stands, has some exemptions in it, but widely restricts the use of them moving forward here. We are after the hearing reviewing all the comments and trying to find something, of course, that finds a good balance between all the different comments and concerns we've heard from people.

Brian Lehrer: Does it matter under the bill what kind of crime they had committed? If somebody's a convicted murderer, but served time and is out, is that more disqualifying than if they had committed shoplifting or I think sex offenders are an exception, but you tell me.

Majority Leader Powers: Yes, you can screen for sex offenders in the sex offender registry right now under the bill that's introduced. We are looking at based on a lot of feedback we've gotten from folks, looking at the different classifications to see how and when and why we might create a distinction between them. I think more broadly, what we're trying to do here, obviously, is to make it easier for people to come back to the city after sentence when they've paid their sentence here, paid their dues here and make it a lot easier because what we're having right now, people are still living in our community. They're just living in a homeless shelter or living on the street instead.

If you want to have a safe city, and you want to have a city of opportunity, you need to have an ability for people to find housing and restabilize their lives. We are looking at different ways to create distinctions based on a lot of feedback we've gotten from folks, but also want to make sure there's a broad opportunity here for people to be able to stabilize their lives. I believe, and I think the evidence shows, if you find good housing and you stabilize your life, you are way less likely to enter back into the criminal justice system. For a lot of folks who are talking about, I also think they paid their sentence, they are far past their criminal past here, and they are ready to restabilize their lives. They can't do that, if they are only allowed to live in a homeless shelter here in New York City. We know that that's not going to stabilize their life.

Brian Lehrer: That works against crime in general because if they have stable housing, that works against them feeling tempted to resort to a life of crime again. You're seeing this as a hedge against recidivism, and more danger to the public, if it's easier for people who've gotten criminal convictions and served their time to get housing. I see it. Is there a point though, do I understand the bill correctly, where a landlord still can use discretion with respect to an individual that what the bill bars them from doing is using it as a disqualifier on a early background check, screening level assessment of the individual, but then once they pass that and once they're actually up for the apartment, then the landlords can still assess perceived dangerousness in some way?

Majority Leader Powers: Ours right now gets rid of the background check. Other states like New Jersey have done it. Detroit have done point in time checks. Oakland, which did it recently, did a blanket ban. My concern with the background checks is that they're riddled with inaccuracies. The reports you can read on this are pretty clear that they have a lot of downside when you continue to rely on them, but we have heard a lot of feedback from folks. We are looking at the other models as well to potentially create more opportunities for those small property owners and others that we've talked to, to have their concerns addressed.

Ours right now gets rid of them because we think it's the clearest way to address this issue, but I've heard feedback. We're looking at other jurisdictions as well. It's possible we move in one of those directions, but it's really, really important this conversation happens, because I think for many of us, we're not facing this issue. Like I said, 750,000 New Yorkers and their families are facing this almost every single day. We've heard the stories of the hearing and in the press and from people working on this issue about how meaningful it is to find a good place to live, and in doing that after rounds, and rounds of being denied.

Brian Lehrer: You're saying the bill is still in development, and the details could change. Is that an indication that you do not have majority support yet to pass this bill even with 45 of 51 council members being Democrats?

Majority Leader Powers: We have enough support to pass it. Over a majority of city council signed on. I think we're in the 30s right now. We have other indications of support from folks who haven't yet signed on. I feel very, very good about where our support is. I think the process is always that we want to go back and look at all the comments and feedback from the hearing. Obviously, take that into account as we go forward. That's the way I legislate at least. We started this bill with wide, wide support. We went into the hearing, I think with over 31 city council members, more than a majority on it in addition to the borough presidents and the city controller, and the public advocate. Wide widespread support here for a really important issue.

Brian Lehrer: You didn't mention the mayor. Will he sign it if you pass it?

Majority Leader Powers: The mayor has indicated being in support of it. I think they'll want to see some changes as well, some of their testimony at the hearing. He has in his housing plan earlier this year, and other statements has supported it. I think understands that second chances are pretty critical to having a just city here, but also, as you mentioned, the impact on long-term public safety here by preventing people from reentering the criminal justice system.

Brian Lehrer: All right, ready to talk to a skeptic? Troy in Brooklyn is not convinced. I don't think. Troy, you're on WNYC. Happy New Year.

Troy: Happy New Year, Brian. This is a waste of time. It doesn't solve any problems. It's just an attention-getter. The people who are in homeless shelters, especially mothers, because I've dealt with them, they can't find apartments that are affordable. Once there is, it's like a floodgate that opens up. This is not a problem for people in shelters, because the city councilperson probably hasn't ever have gone to a shelter and asks what they need. This is not an issue that's solving any problems, because there is no issue. The main issue as far as not getting an apartment is income, credit and just the availability of finding anything affordable. This is just a waste of time. Can you focus on getting people housing, building affordable housing, not affordable housing for wealthy people. Affordable housing for the working class, which doesn't exist, and you're not doing anything to help those people.

Brian Lehrer: Are you saying you don't think that the criminal background checks should be banned, or are you saying that this bill is okay with you, but it isn't big enough to deal with the housing problem?

Troy: This bill is a waste of charge. Criminal background checks are primarily only for sex offenders. There's been a lot of limitations already placed on what background checks can be done and what they can affect. This is a waste of time. People need housing and affordable housing. This has nothing to do with it. Again, we're focusing on criminals, which is a smaller even percentage of the people that are even looking for housing. I'm talking about people that are homeless, people that are in shelters that have kids that are trying to get out of shelters. This doesn't help them at all, because it's a matter of them being able to pay their rent or even finding an affordable place to live.

This has nothing to do to help them. Nobody's denying anyone, because of shoplifting, or anything like that. Obviously, there are people that do commit crimes and have committed crimes in housing issues, or apartments that maybe landlords may need to know before they create a problem for the rest of their other tenants, which should be something that if you're going to look into anything, do that, but this city council is just a waste of time. They do stuff just for attention.

Majority Leader Powers: I'm happy to jump in there. Thanks, Troy. Number one is on the housing front. I talked about housing more than almost any other topic, and I have been probably one of the more outspoken voices for needing to build more housing in the city to address the housing crisis and to tackle the widespread affordability issue that we're seeing regionally. Not even just when you talk about New York City. We are doing that. I think if you look at what we have done in this city council this year, I think we've created more units in any calendar year, more both total units, and I think over 60% of them, or high sixties were in the affordable category creating big re-zonings in the city.

I had to give the Speaker herself a lot of credit and my colleagues for pushing through. I have built supportive housing this year, hundreds of units for supportive housing right in my district to make sure that we are housing folks that really need it. I will continue to do that. I've supported shelters in my district, and I will continue to support places for people that need housing to live. I will counter your claim though. I think it's very provable, and it's very clear that this is an issue, and you can hear it. You can come to the hearing and you can hear impacted people who told us about ongoing discrimination that they're facing, because of their criminal record.

I think it's the only part I'm confused about is if you're saying it's a waste of time, because the sex offender registry is mostly the tool here, then I assume you would be in support of the bill because then it under your argument doesn't really have any value to the housing conversation. My message would be this, we have to do all of the above. We have to build new housing, we have to preserve affordable housing, we have to break down barriers of discrimination, and we have to do a lot of different things that are in our toolbox in order to address housing.

We have to increase the rate of the price of vouchers, which we did last year and create all those opportunities. We shouldn't hand somebody a voucher to go to a housing knowing that there's potential for them to be discriminated against once they get there. That would be counterintuitive to me.

Brian Lehrer: Let's take another phone call. Here is Derek in Dumont, New Jersey. You're on WNYC. Hi, Derek.

Derek: Hi. Thanks for taking my call. Can you hear me?

Brian Lehrer: I can hear you. Thank you for making your call. Happy New Year.

Derek: Hi, Council Member Powers. Thanks. I have a question regarding the sex offenders that you mentioned. I'm a sex offender. I went to prison for two years, regrettably, and I'm just wondering why are they excluded from this kind of a program when sex offenders specifically have among the lowest recidivism rates for sex offenses among any other criminal category, and are continually left out of government and state programs, and also on a regular basis spend more than their actual sentencing time in prison because of this really, really strict residential laws.

I had to actually had to move out of New York completely. We had to basically find a home in New Jersey because there was no way they were going to allow me to live anywhere in New York City. Forget about government programs. Why are they excluded from these programs when the recidivism rates are so low? I know it's politically kryptonite for people to try, and actually say, "Oh, I'm going to support sex offenders." It's just totally against really what the data suggests. That's my question.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you, Derek. Very candid. There's a question you probably didn't expect to get, Council Member.

Majority Leader Powers: It's okay. This is why you come to Brian Lehrer Show. I thank you for that call, Derek, and appreciate the question. It's been part of the conversation. This bill actually dates back to last session. I had a different sponsor. I was of the sponsor of it, but not the main sponsor the last term. That was one of the discussion points last term as carried on, and continued into this session as well. For both some technical logistical parts of how you do background checks, versus how you check the registry. It was a part of discussion. Also, around some of the sensitivities, I'd say, that came up from tenants and colleagues, and landlords. It was incorporated into the bill.

I think last term, it was not originally incorporated into it, then made it into after there were some rounds of changes. I think it's based on some of the comments and feedback that have come back from people. Like I've said, I certainly recognize, and understand the challenges here when it comes to finding housing, and how critical housing is to everybody's safety, and security. It was part of the dialogue last session and has come up again in the conversation this time around. That's just to give you a clear answer on that.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you for calling, Derek. We appreciate it. Another skeptic, I should say. This one saying he's a constituent of yours, skeptic from the other side as the last caller. TJ in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hello.

TJ: Hi, Keith. I'm a constituent.

Majority Leader Powers: Hey there. How are you doing?

TJ: This is the type of woke legislation, which only results in more Republicans getting elected. I mentioned this to some of my neighbors, and they were outraged. How can he allow this blah, blah, blah? If I was working on a Republican campaign, I would leave the campaign with this information. In a housing application, the landlord can ask, were you ever convicted of a crime? That's perfectly a legitimate question. This doesn't achieve anything. It only encourages those on the right to get all upset. It's an example of why there are more Republicans elected to the city council and why Zeldin came close to getting elected as the governor.

Majority Leader Powers: Thanks, TJ. Thank you for that. Like I said, and obviously as a constituent, could you feel free to call my office as well. Look, it's really important right now and I understand the public reaction to it. I understand the political reaction to it. I'm not insensitive to those. I'm elected official. On their side of this equation is I've been in the office for five years and we keep cycling through, in my opinion, the same issues. We keep coming back to a homelessness crisis, or housing crisis. We come back to a crisis around incarceration and people not having proper reentry services and not being able to get stabilized, stabilize their lives through housing.

There are perpetual issues that we face here in the city. I think that if we are going to try to solve these big issues, we need to start taking bigger swings at the issues than we have taken in the past because we can't keep going through the same cycles and expect for me that we're going to get new results out of them. It's really important to me we have public safety. It's really important to me that we make sure that we find a good balance here.

It's also really important that we give people access to housing, that we build more for the house, and that we do all the things I mentioned earlier, but I was the chair of the Criminal Justice Committee last term. I watched this issue play out. I represent the Bellevue Men's shelter. It's the intake center for people. We can't continue to just tell people to go live there or in another shelter system while they're trying to rebuild their lives. It's really important that we find some way in process, that we give people a better option and that will solve the long-term problems that we've been facing the city over the last few decades, in my opinion.

Brian Lehrer: What if they were convicted of breaking into people's homes and burglarizing? Is that an exception?

Majority Leader Powers: We're looking at it. Look, like I mentioned earlier, right now, we put out the bill, we've had a hearing on it, and now we're taking feedback. Those types of issues have come up. People have raised, what about the other places. Do other places do it? Looking at all the above and obviously taking in feedback from my colleagues as well. I've always come to the table meeting with all stakeholders and we try to find the best version of a bill that we can do to balance all the different comments and concerns.

Why I'm taking on this issue and as TJ Net noted, it's probably not the most popular issue at times in the public perception, but I think it's critical. I think it's critical that I think housing plays a very critical role in public safety. I think it plays a critical role in long-term opportunities in the city. I think it's a really essential, important issue is to give people better access to housing in order to have a long-term, good, healthy city here.

Brian Lehrer: What about the politics that the caller TJ raises? He said if he was launching a Republican campaign against you or against anybody in City Council, if this passes, he would focus on this. We did just see in November most of the House seats that Democrats lost to Republicans were in the New York area. We saw how close Lee Zeldin came to Kathy Hochul running almost entirely on the issue of crime. As the caller put it, this is again, the Democrats being more concerned with the criminals than the victims or he said something like that. What do you say to the politics of that and the risk?

Majority Leader Powers: I would say that I think when we talk about public safety, I think this is part of the public safety conversation and it's not at the front. It's not the front part of it in terms of the back end side of it, meaning that it's when people have paid their sentence, are exiting the criminal justice system, and in most cases, in many cases, folks want to get out of that lifestyle and want to come back and rebuild their lives. That is part of public safety too. I think the question is what do you do with that individual and where do they live? I understand the sensitivity and I also understand people's desire to know who's in their building. I live in a building of strangers for the most part.

I know some folks in my building. I don't know every single person who lives here, and I never will. I do, of course, still deserve, and everybody does, a right to feel safe in that environment. I think most of the people we're talking about are going to be good neighbors and good tenants and be good safe neighbors. Also, we have to have a conversation about long-term health of the city and the public safety of it, and the people who live within it. When you are leaving the criminal justice system, that should not carry around with you for the rest of your life, in my opinion.

Brian Lehrer: We're out of time except to ask what's the timeline? When will this come to a vote? If you know.

Majority Leader Powers: Yes, look, we would like to get something passed obviously this year. We are taking all the feedback in we had from and including people that call in or reach out to my office, we're taking all that in and we are going to probably continue working on the bill for a little bit and then try to get something passed. Like I said, we have a majority of the City Council on it already, widespread support. We are working on getting something done in 2023 and, hopefully, something that will have broad support when we finalize it.

Brian Lehrer: City Council Majority Leader Keith Powers, who's on District 4, is in midtown and the Upper East Side. Sponsor of the bill to limit criminal background checks on prospective tenants. One of the big issues in front of City Council right now and starting to get a lot of attention in the news. Thank you very much for coming on and talking it through with us. We really, really appreciate it.

Majority Leader Powers: Thank you, Brian. Thank you all the callers as well.

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.