Gotbaum to Quinn: Get Your Priorities Straight

Today, I responded to Council Speaker Quinn’s claim that restoring the Office of the Public Advocate’s budget was “not a priority.” Despite the fact that the city is experiencing the worst economy it has seen since the Great Depression, Speaker Quinn found more money for this year's budget than was allocated last year, almost $50 million for member items - $17 million that she handed out herself. However, the Speaker still passed a budget that cut the Office of the Public Advocate by nearly 40 percent.

 

Speaker Quinn’s priorities seem to be putting her political future before the interest of New Yorkers.  While she spent last fiscal year overturning the will of the voters, my office was busy watching out for New Yorkers short-changed by the City.  The Office of the Public Advocate is vital to helping vulnerable New Yorkers access city services. Speaker Quinn was right about one thing: This office does good work. But I have a bridge right outside my office to sell to anyone who buys her explanation for not restoring.

In the past year alone, the Office of the Public Advocate has worked to produce the following results:
•    The Department of Education made its Special Education hotline available to parents
•    The Parks Department stopped using potentially-hazardous recycled tires as turf in playgrounds and parks
•    The City temporarily suspended its policy of charging rent to homeless people who have income and live in shelters
•    The Health and Hospitals Corporation now provides free emergency contraception at clinics
•    The Health and Hospitals Corporation agreed to develop a system-wide LGBT sensitivity training program
The Public Advocate's office created the city's first comprehensive guide to public benefits for immigrants. Nearly 25,000 copies of the guide, which provides eligibility and enrollment information on over forty public benefits, have been distributed to date. And Betsy Gotbaum’s Commission on School Governance created a blueprint for changing school governance law so it is more transparent, accountable, and responsive to parents.
 
The Office of the Public Advocate, in addition to serving as a watchdog over all city agencies, helps over 12,000 New Yorkers ever year access city services and solve their problems with city government. The office reduces barriers to food stamps, improves women’s access to reproductive services, and increases protections for abused and neglected children. The citywide office regularly operates on a budget that is about half that of some borough presidents, just over $3 million at its height, or about 1/200 of 1 percent of the total city budget.

Some examples of the individuals helped by the Office of the Public Advocate in the past year include:
 
Case #1
A very worried Bronx mother of three, fearing her Section 8 subsidized housing voucher was about to expire, contacted my office for help. The woman, 41, said she had found a suitable apartment but that her assigned Section 8 housing assistant from the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) wasn't actually assisting. Though she said she had submitted all relevant paperwork, including the lease, the housing assistant never sent anyone to inspect the apartment. In the meantime, the woman had received a letter saying the housing voucher would be terminated, since she had never used it. But she couldn't use the voucher until NYCHA inspected the apartment. Frances Santiago, one of my ombuds staffers, contacted the appropriate NYCHA office and explained the woman's dilemma. Shortly afterward, the woman received the Section 8 documents that enabled her to make the move.

Case #2
A Brooklyn woman who had suffered a violent assault in her neighborhood contacted my office for help with a move from her subsidized apartment. She had been granted an emergency transfer because of her status as an intimidated victim. But when she told her landlord she was moving, she said, he became angry and, apparently out of spite, immediately started an eviction process. That had the effect of delaying her transfer. Frances Santiago handled the case for my office. She advised the woman to collect all relevant documents and take them directly to the NYCHA housing office that had approved her transfer. The woman did so. The office investigated, in due time found that a judge had dismissed the landlord's case, and promptly expanded the emergency transfer to a portable transfer, which allowed the woman to move anywhere in the United States.

Case #3
A distraught Queens mother contacted my office about "the Pre-K (pre-Kindergarten) system mess," as she accurately described it. She said that her only child, a 4-year-old girl, was among those affected. She and her daughter, along with her daughter's neighborhood friends, had attended an open house at PS 21.  All liked the school, all applied for a pre-K placement there, and all received letters of acceptance -- except for the woman's daughter, who received a letter of rejection. The thing is, the mother said, all the applicants were similarly situated -- all lived in the appropriate zone, and none had siblings at PS 21, which would have given them preference. The families even mailed their applications at the same time, the mother said.

The mother promptly appealed. She went to the school, and she contacted various enrollment departments, all to no avail. "They kept saying this system is correct. All placement was done by computer," she said. But when she returned to PS 21 yet again and spoke to the principal, she learned that another Pre-K applicant had been rejected even with a sibling in the school. That, the mother said, made it "100 per cent clear that the computer system is not correct."
Further, "Who's responsible for explaining to my 4-year-old why she couldn't go to school with all her friends? ... I really felt I'm damned by the new system. I even wrote a complaint letter to the chancellor's office. But everyone seemed to ignore me. No response from them at all. This is really crazy."   

Sandra Maury, one of my ombuds staffers, contacted the city Department of Education (DOE) on behalf of the mother, who works full time. Ms. Maury questioned why the woman's daughter had received a rejection letter. Shortly afterward, the mother contacted us again. Thanks to our help, she said, her daughter had been admitted to PS 21 after all. She added, "Your prompt reply was really helpful."

Case #4
A counselor at Lutheran Family Health Centers contacted my office on behalf of a Brooklyn man who lives with his mother, a senior, in Red Hook Houses. A  month earlier, the man had contacted the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) about a leak in his bathroom. NYCHA plumbers repaired the leak, but in correcting that problem they created another: They left such gaping holes in the ceiling and walls that the man and his mother were unable to bathe properly. Bronce Perez intervened in this case as well. He contacted a woman who handles emergency repairs for NYCHA, asking that the damaged bathroom be repaired immediately. The NYCHA staffer called back a few hours later to say that she had sent a maintenance crew to inspect the damage and that repairs were scheduled for the next day.

Case #5
A Manhattan woman contacted my office for help with a problem that even Housing Court hadn't solved. For several years the woman, whose apartment is on the top floor of an Upper West Side building, had lived with a leaky roof. Every time it rained, she said, she had to position buckets around her living room to catch the multiple drips. She pursued the matter in Housing Court, and the judge ruled in her favor. But the roof, unrepaired, continued to leak. Bronce Perez, one of my ombuds staffers, contacted the city Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) on the woman's behalf. An inspector promptly investigated -- and promptly issued a notice of violation.

Case #6
A desperate single father from Queens contacted my office for help with a pending eviction. Despite a full-time job, he had suffered financial reversals and had fallen nearly $8,000 behind in his rent. He applied for an emergency grant, commonly called a One-Shot Deal, from the city Human Resources Administration (HRA). He was told that he first had to remit a check for half the arrears. He did so, then awaited HRA action.

There was none. Day after day, with eviction looming, the man called HRA to ask about the status of the grant. No one took his calls. He left daily voicemails. No one called him back. This continued for about one month. When he received formal notice of his eviction date, he called my office.

With time running out, Jessica Burgos, my ombuds deputy director, finally called an HRA official -- who took her call. Ms. Burgos urged immediate action, noting that the man and his 8-year-old son were on the very brink of homelessness, even after complying with all HRA requirements for the emergency grant.

The official promised to personally and promptly look into the case, and she did precisely that: By day's end, she reported that the man's application for the One-Shot Deal had been approved. Checks to the landlord were cut, the eviction was canceled, and father and son remain in their apartment.

Case #7
A very worried woman contacted my office for help with a criminal matter. She had just learned that her aunt, 80, was in danger of losing her home in Borough Park, Brooklyn, which had been in the family for eight decades. A man unknown to the family, the niece said, had fraudulently removed the aunt's name from property records and replaced it with his own. For one thing, that enabled the man to receive and cash the aunt's $400 property tax rebate check. Elsa Suazo, one of my ombuds staffers, intervened by contacting the city Department of Finance, which oversees the relevant property records. Staffers there contacted the city Department of Investigation, which promptly looked into the matter. The man was arrested, and the aunt, who is recovering from major hip surgery, remains the legal owner of the family home.

Case #8
A Manhattan man contacted my office regarding the custodial staff at Public School 83 in East Harlem who, he said, left piles of garbage adjacent to a curbside sewer drain, causing it to clog. Apart from that, the man said, smelly liquids seeped onto the sidewalk and left a lingering stench. A custodian told Bronce Perez, one of my ombuds staffers, that a former superintendent from the city Department of Sanitation (DSNY) had allowed the garbage placement. Mr. Perez then called a current DSNY superintendent, who personally went to the school to investigate. The superintendent spoke with the chief custodian and the school principal, advising them to stop leaving garbage in the problem area. The DSNY visit had the desired effect: No more garbage clogs the drain, the area has been cleaned, and the pervasive stench has disappeared.

Case #9
A Brooklyn woman, the mother of twin sons with special needs, called my office for help because the twins had been assigned to different high schools. One of her sons was emotionally fragile, unable to travel by himself and basically willing to speak only to his twin. Yet when their mother asked that her sons be placed in at least the same school, if not the same classes, the city Department of Education (DOE) denied her request. DOE policy for placing siblings in the same school does not extend to high school.

Mable Robertson intervened on her behalf. The case was complicated by the fact that the mother had gone to a "walk-in only" DOE Enrollment Center, but staffers there had misplaced her son's medical documents and other paperwork. After numerous phone calls and a repeat visit to the Enrollment Center, the son's records were located. Eventually the twins were enrolled in the same Brooklyn high school -- and I'm pleased to report that, once again, they are enjoying school.

Case #10
A Manhattan man contacted my office about extensive construction under way in an apartment building without benefit of a work permit. He also complained about multiple structural defects in apartments 3A and 5A, which were directly above and below 4A, the unit under construction. Floors and ceiling beams, he said, were so decayed that they were on the verge of collapse. He feared that if the floors and ceiling did in fact fail, families living above and below 4A might suffer catastrophic injury. Bronce Perez, one of my ombuds staffers, immediately contacted the city Department of Buildings. An inspector promptly went to the building, in Spanish Harlem, and issued a Stop Work Order on 4A. After inspecting apartments 3A and 5A, he also issued several violation notices to the landlord, instructing him to make repairs.

Case #11
An irate Brooklyn man contacted my office after his Food Stamps had been cut off because, he said, he was unable to travel to the appropriate Food Stamps office to recertify. He wanted relevant documents to be e-mailed to him so that he could recertify by way of the Internet. When Heather Francis, one of my ombuds staffers, intervened on his behalf, she learned that he actually didn't have to travel to the office. However, he was required to sign certain recertification papers and mail them back. After that was done, a Food Stamps staffer planned to interview him over the telephone. After much coaxing, the man signed the paperwork and mailed it to us. We faxed it to his Food Stamps office, and within three business days he received his benefit.

Case #12
A very worried Manhattan woman contacted my office because a storage company was about to auction her property, due to nonpayment of fees. The woman, homebound after a lengthy hospital stay, was unable to travel to a city Human Resources Administration (HRA) office to apply for a one-time emergency grant known as a One-Shot Deal. Heather Francis, one of my ombuds staffers, also intervened in this case. She contacted HRA, and the woman was referred to its homebound unit. A few days later, an HRA staffer visited the woman, enabling her to apply for the One-Shot Deal. But the auction was imminent. Ms. Francis asked the storage company to remove the woman's name from the auction list, thereby giving HRA time to process her application. The company reluctantly agreed. Ms. Francis also asked HRA to expedite the One-Shot Deal application. Shortly afterward, HRA advised that the storage company had been paid in full, $1,048.
 
Case #13
The parents of a NYC student contacted my office last week regarding their daughter’s door-to-door bus service. Since the beginning of the school year they have been troubled by the length of their daughter’s’ commute to school. What is normally a 5-7 minute car ride instead takes over an hour. The school is only a mile and a half away. While her commute may be within the guidelines, it does not make sense to put a six-year-old child on a bus for that length of time when the school is so close. As a special needs student, the longer commute was especially difficult for her. My office was able to intervene and successfully switch her school bus route to a shorter route.

Case #14
A Catholic nun contacted my office about a disabled Bronx mother and her disabled adult daughter. Both women were hospitalized at the time, but their neighbor, the nun said, had advised that the women had been living in "horrendous" conditions, even though they were clients of city Adult Protective Services. Among other things, the home was said to be overrun with flies, fleas, roaches and rodents. The bathroom ceiling had collapsed, leaving rubble in the tub and broken floor tiles.

Bronce Perez, one of my ombuds staffers, immediately called code enforcement services for the city Department of Housing Preservation and Development. It turns out that the building had 232 violations, including several in the women's apartment. After Mr. Perez intervened, a guardian ad litem was appointed on their behalf. We insisted that their landlord be taken to court, and he was. The judge ordered him to make repairs. He did so, and mother and daughter have since returned to a cleaner, safer home.   

Case #15
The resolution of this unusual case generated an appreciative note from a Staten Island landlord. She wrote, "...My vote and confidence in you did not go to waste, because you have proven that your installation as Public Advocate means that you can certainly deliver on your promises of being a watchdog over city government ... I sincerely thank your office for its diligence in dealing with [this] matter and obtaining effective results."

The landlord's problem was part of the aftermath of a horrific crime: One of her Section 8 tenants allegedly beat to death the tenant's 6-year-old son. Soon afterward, with the tenant in custody, the New York City Housing Authority stopped paying its share of the tenant's rent. Problem was, the landlord couldn't re-rent the apartment because it had been sealed as a crime scene. Month after month, the landlord's dealings with the Staten Island Leased Housing Office and other city agencies went nowhere. One of my ombudswomen intervened on her behalf. She made multiple phone calls and re-faxed required documents to the Brooklyn Leased Housing Office, which now serves Staten Island. Finally, after eight months of rental arrears, the landlord called to say that she had received a check for $8,176.

Case #16
A Brooklyn businessman complained that New York Police Department (NYPD) officers were parking their vehicles on the sidewalk in front of his store. The vehicles, he said, blocked customer access. He also said that the sidewalk parking created a safety issue, since it forced pedestrians to walk in the street. On his behalf, one of my ombudswomen contacted the NYPD borough chief, who promptly looked into the matter. A follow-up meeting brought together police, the businessman's building manager and representatives of the City Council and Community Board 2. Their discussion led to a mutually-agreeable plan to install metal and cement barriers to regulate parking and increase the width of the sidewalk. A nearby parking lot also is to be enlarged. Further, police officers from this precinct have been instructed to pay special attention to this site.

Case #17
A Bronx woman, eligible for Section 8 subsidies, was having trouble submitting the information that would verify her eligibility. Her caseworker was unresponsive and she found herself overdue on rent, so she called my office for assistance. After contacting the Assistant Director at Bronx Leased Housing, one of my ombuds staffers was able to secure the $1047.00 that this constituent was owed by the city.  She was extremely grateful that the Public Advocate’s Office helped see her through a difficult situation.

Case #18
A single mother from Brooklyn contacted my office for help for her son, 6, who had been diagnosed with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Impulsive Behavior Disorder. Her son's Individualized Education Program called for placing him in District 75, reserved for students with special needs. Due to lack of space, however, the boy attended regular public school. Tevina Willis, one of my ombudswomen, contacted the Office of Student Enrollment Planning and Operations for the city Department of Education (DOE), after which the son was offered placement in a District 75 school. But the mother found that the environment -- a church basement -- was ill suited to the needs of her young son. The mother eventually received a Nickerson Letter, in which DOE agrees to pay tuition at a state-approved private school. The mother, assisted by DOE's Committee on Special Education, is awaiting placement.

Case #19
A woman who is the primary caregiver for her adult son, who is 27 and autistic, contacted my office about their living conditions in Queens. She described them as "terrible."  Their apartment, she said needed fixing "in every respect." It had no hot water, not enough water pressure to flush the toilet, broken tiles, crumbling plaster, peeling paint and more. The mother had found a new apartment that would accept a Section 8 housing voucher, but, she said, the Queens Leased Housing Office kept asking for additional information before the unit could be inspected, as required. Eventually the voucher expired, and the woman lost the rental. Frances Santiago, one of my ombudswomen, intervened on her behalf. She contacted the housing office and explained, in detail, the unsuitability of the present apartment, given the condition of the adult son. As a direct result, the woman received a new voucher.

Case #20
A Manhattan man contacted my office about a long-dead tree in his Murray Hill neighborhood. He already had called 311 about the tree, with no resolution. Tommy Lin, one of my ombudsmen, intervened in the matter, sending a letter to the city Department of Parks & Recreation. Parks investigated and reported that the tree was indeed dead and would be scheduled for removal.  A month later, the man called to say that the tree had been removed, as promised.
 
Case #21
A Howard Beach man contacted my office about a broken water pipe beneath an abandoned house next door to his home. Water literally gushed from the pipe, he said. That created potential danger, since nearby houses were built on stilts. With the ground growing ever muddier, the man feared that fragile foundations could be undermined, and houses could collapse. One of my ombudsmen immediately contacted the city Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which promptly dispatched an inspector. The next day, DEP reported that water to the broken pipe had been shut off.

Case #22
A Brooklyn woman contacted my office about the dirty drinking water, as she described it, that flowed from her faucets, forcing her to buy bottled water. One of my ombudsmen immediately contacted the city Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and asked for an investigation. When we followed up with the woman, she told us that a DEP inspector had indeed come to her home shortly after our call. His visit had the desired effect: Several days afterward, she said, drinking water began running clear and clean from her faucets.

Case #23
A Manhattan mother of three called my office about non-receipt of child support payments for a son who had been in foster care. During her son's time in foster care, the support payments had gone to the city Human Resources Administration (HRA). But the payments continued going to HRA after the boy came home. The mother called the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) to report her son's change in status and to ask that the payments now come to her. But OCSE, she said, would neither release the back payments nor redirect future payments to her account. One of my ombudswomen immediately contacted OCSE on the mother's behalf. OCSE said they were withholding payments because they suspected that the woman was receiving funds from another agency. We clarified that she was not, and the agency in question wrote a letter to that effect. We sent the letter to OCSE, and shortly afterward a check for more than $3,000 was deposited in the mother's account.

Case #24
A homeless Manhattan mother of three contacted my office for a help with a shelter eviction: East River Family Center had discharged her and her family for violating a 48-hour curfew, meaning that they had been absent without leave for more than two days. The woman contested the AWOL charge, which had triggered a separate issue: She feared she would lose her certification for the Work Advantage Program if she and her family had to return to the city Department of Homeless Services (DHS) for new placement. One of my ombudsmen contacted DHS on her behalf. Shortly afterward, DHS reported that the family had been discharged in error. The mother and her children have since returned to the East River Family Center.

Case #25
A sleep-deprived Manhattan woman contacted my office about incessant nighttime noise, including that from jack hammers, that kept her awake. The noise began about 10 p.m., she said, and continued past midnight. She twice had complained to 311, but the noise continued. When she again called 311 to follow up, she said, she was told that her case was closed, that a check showed that no construction was under way at the address she gave. Incredulous, she pressed the issue. She eventually learned that her complaint had been filed for an address in Queens, not Manhattan. Again she complained to 311, again nothing happened. When she followed up, she was told -- again -- that her case was closed due to "no construction." At that point, she said, she opened her window so that the 311 operator could hear the pounding, nerve-jangling sounds of "no construction." The operator found that the building in question had one expired construction permit and another that ran until April 9.

One of my ombudsmen contacted the city Department of Buildings (DOB) on the woman's behalf. DOB investigated and promptly issued a partial stop-work order. The after-hours noise level has since abated, allowing the woman to get a full night's sleep.

Case #26
A Queens woman contacted my office about five large orange barrels that contractors hired by the city Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) had left on her lawn. The woman called both DEP and 311 but, she said, no one agreed to remove the barrels, which had been brought in after a water main break. She herself would have moved the barrels to the curb for a sanitation pickup, but they were too heavy for her to lift. One of my ombudsmen called DEP's Bureau of Water and Sewer Operations, and a staffer there contacted the contractor. Shortly afterward, the barrels were removed.

Case #27
The manager of a Manhattan cooperative apartment building contacted my office about inaccurate bills from the city Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). DEP, he said, had sent the co-op owners' corporation bills for a dental office, but the building had no dental office. DEP also sent the corporation bills relating to a coal lift, but the building hadn't had a coal lift in decades. Finally, DEP had agreed to reimburse the corporation for the cost of installing a new water meter, but several years had passed -- and no reimbursement. One of my ombudsmen contacted DEP about all three billing issues. A few days afterward, the co-op manager called to say that he had spoken to DEP. The problems had been corrected, and the reimbursement would be forthcoming.
Case #28
The single mother of a 5-year-old applied for public benefits shortly after her unemployment insurance ran out in December, 2007. She was allocated $600 a month, plus rental assistance. But the woman, who lived in the Bronx, was accused of not complying with work and training requirements. She applied for a "fair hearing" and went to a mandatory dispute resolution meeting where, she said, she was told she did not have to attend the subsequent hearing. That information was incorrect, and she was sanctioned for not making the required appearance. Eventually her benefits were cut from $600 to $125. Additionally, her rent checks were withheld, leaving her $4,000 in arrears. Facing eviction, and clearly not getting correct information from her benefits center, she approached my office.

One of my ombudswomen immediately contacted the woman's benefits center and was told that the sanctions would be lifted. My ombudswoman also asked that the case be expedited, and it was, such that the woman quickly received her missing benefits. Rent checks that had been withheld also were released, and mother and child remain in their apartment.
Case #29
A disabled Brooklyn man called my office about his efforts to reinstate his driver's license, which had been suspended for non-payment of child support. Problem was, he needed to drive to kidney dialysis treatment three days a week. After the suspension, his children's mother waived some of the arrears, leaving him owing $504. He agreed to pay the $504 and signed an affidavit to that effect. But after two months, the license still had not been reinstated. He contacted the city Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) and was told that his affidavit never arrived. In the meantime, he had had to travel to South Carolina to deal with a family emergency. With no suitable public transportation available, he had to pay carfare to keep his dialysis appointments. On his behalf, one of my ombudswomen contacted OCSE. We requested another affidavit and, to save time, arranged for it to be faxed. Given the hardship involved, we also asked that OCSE expedite its paperwork. OCSE agreed, promptly lifting the suspension and sending a compliance letter to the state Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). OCSE also sent a copy of the letter to the Brooklyn man, which he'll keep in his car until DMV updates its records. This is an example of how our ombudsman unit helps people work to solve their problems.

Case #30
The Brooklyn mother of twin girls, age 16 months, contacted my office about a problem that arose after both children had been diagnosed with autism. A meeting had been scheduled to determine what Early Intervention Services the girls would receive. This meeting, however, is supposed to take place within 45 days after a child's evaluation. The meeting about the twins would have taken place 63 days after evaluation. The girls' mother believed that 63 days was too long to go without intervention. But her efforts to reschedule the meeting to an earlier date were unsuccessful. On the mother's behalf, one of my ombudswomen contacted the chair of the DOE Committee on Special Education in her district and asked that the meeting be moved up. Within two hours, the mother called to say that the meeting had been rescheduled.

Case #31
A Queens woman called my office about an empty building that blighted her St. Albans neighborhood. Its landlord, she said, had evicted its tenants more than two months earlier but left the building's front yard strewn with trash and abandoned furniture. Squatters moved in and began using the yard and its unsightly furniture as a daytime hangout. One of my ombudsmen immediately called the city Department of Sanitation (DSNY) and apprised them of the problem. Hours later, a DSNY official called back to say that the it had been cleaned up. The Queens woman was effusive in her praise for the freshly-cleaned yard, DSNY's thorough work and the quick, same-day response.

Comments

[Ellen McHugh]

All of NYC benefits when there are objective and non-partison reviews of NYC government. It is indeed unfortunate that the Mayor and the City Council are unable, or unwilling, to permit independent scrutiny of their actions and activities by the Public Advocate.
New Yorkers expect and deserve someone who speaks on their behalf, without pressure from well heeled funders or partisan constituents. That was, and I am sure will contiue to be, the focus of the current Public Advocate, Betsy Gotbaum. Congratualtions to her for a job well done, without fanfare and benefitting all New Yorkers.

[air conditioner]

Now thats a mega post,

Thanks for such informative information

Regards

Richard