Latest news with #Article78
Yahoo
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Judge rules Mayor Adams broke law in blocking NYC jails solitary confinement ban
A New York State Supreme Court judge has ruled Mayor Adams broke the law when he refused to implement elements of a city law severely restricting the use of solitary confinement in the jails. Local Law 42 was passed in December 2023, and the City Council overrode the mayor's subsequent veto in January 2024. Since then, Adams has used repeated executive orders to suspend parts of the law, citing public safety. The Council then sued Dec. 9, arguing the mayor could not use emergency powers to override a decision by the city's duly elected legislature. On Monday, Judge Jeffrey Pearlman ruled in the Council's favor. 'When the City Council overturns a mayoral veto, it is not an emergency. It is a democratic process. By declaring a state of emergency and issuing emergency orders, the mayor violated that process,' wrote Pearlman. Pearlman noted the Council passed Local Law 42 after years of hearings and debate including extensive input from the mayor and Department of Correction. That input led to 'material changes' in the law's language. 'While the court respects the immense power that the state gives the executive, that [the Mayor] disagreed with the City Council on the passage of Local Law 42 cannot be considered an emergency of the sort imagined by the state Legislature.' Pearlman wrote that he was referring to state Executive Law 24, which allows mayors to declare emergencies and use broad powers if 'public safety is imperiled.' That law cites 'disaster, rioting, catastrophe, or similar public emergency' as reasons for issuing such an emergency order. Adams first invoked emergency orders to suspend Local Law 42 on July 27, 2024, the date before the law went into effect. Emergency Executive Order 624 stated the law 'severely limits the use of restrictive housing, de-escalation confinement, restraints in movement and emergency lock-ins' and therefore raises 'serious public safety concerns.' Adams also argued the law 'conflicted' with court orders in the Nunez class action lawsuit which alleged the city failed to deal with violence and use of force in the jails. The case led to the creation of the federal monitor to recommend fixes. Mostly recently, the judge in the case ruled a manager will be appointed to take over some functions from city control. The monitor also cited unease with portions of the law. In a Jan. 12 letter to the city, the monitor, Steve Martin, wrote the law 'could inadvertently undermine the overall goals of protecting individuals from harm.' Adams has reissued the order every five days as required by state law. The Council filed its Article 78 lawsuit Dec. 9 with Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, alleging Adams' orders amounted to 'an undemocratic abuse of power that no previous New York City Mayor has even attempted.' 'Mayor Adams' decision to exceed his legal authority, simply because he was overruled, undermines the foundation of our democracy, and it must be invalidated,' Council Speaker Adrienne Adams said at the time. Reps for Adams did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Binghamton judge censured, returning to bench in April
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. (WIVT/WBGH) – Judge Daniel Seiden is returning to Binghamton City Court after being censured for contributing to a hostile work environment. Seiden was escorted from City Hall by security on July 23, 2024, as he was coming off the bench from hearing a case and was forced to clear out his office several days later. He was transferred to Cortland City Court under the guise of needing to assist that court because it was understaffed. According to court filings, Seiden was not told that he was the subject of an administrative complaint and the Unified Court System refused to acknowledge to News 34 that he was under investigation. Thus, Binghamton voters were unaware of the accusations against him when they re-elected him unopposed to another 10-year term in November. It was only then that Seiden says in a court filing that he was informed of the accusation against him. It all stems from a meeting he had with the Binghamton Court Clerk Jennifer Katz back in April of 2023 in which Seiden admits that he strenuously objected to an administrative switch from a manual to a web-based tracking system for criminal cases. During that heated argument, Seiden said 'stay out of my shorts' which he claims is a colloquial way of saying 'stay out of my business.' According to the state's Commission on Judicial Conduct, which released the censure today, Seiden also made disparaging comments about his fellow judges, blamed Katz for the loss of capable staff and refused to use the new system. Nevertheless, the 6th Judicial District's Administrative Judge Eugene Faughnan waited 15 months to have Seiden removed under armed guard in an apparent effort to embarrass him. After January 1, when the Cortland Court returned to full staff and when Binghamton had lost a judge, Seiden remained in exile. So, he filed an Article 78 procedure seeking to be returned to the jurisdiction that he was re-elected to and complaining about his 500-mile-per-week commute. In that filing, he accused Faughnan, Katz and Katz's husband Joshua Shapiro, who is Faughnan's Special Counsel, of fostering a corrosive culture. Ultimately, the CJC finally came to a determination that Seiden should be censured for his behavior and Seiden voluntarily completed a course on appropriate workplace communication and accepted the censure. He is now scheduled to return to City Court on April 28. His term is set to expire at the end of 2028 because he will have reached the mandatory retirement age of 70. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Frustrated Brooklyn tenants rally against rent hikes and poor living conditions
BROOKLYN, N.Y. (PIX11) — Dozens of tenants from Rutland Road Houses in Brownsville, Brooklyn, gathered on the steps of Brooklyn Borough Hall Thursday morning to protest significant rent hikes and poor living conditions. The rally, led by resident Larissa Assogba, aimed to voice concerns over what they claim are unjustified rent increases despite deteriorating living conditions. More Local News Assogba, who has lived in Rutland Plaza since 2018, expressed her frustration: 'The conditions in that building are horrible. This is considered a first world country, it's giving third world, let's be for real'. She further emphasized the severity of the situation, stating, 'We're asking for human rights. Nobody should be living with sewage. We're dealing with mold, and our rent is going up 700 to a thousand dollars. The city is already expensive'. The protesters directed their grievances toward their landlord, Amistad Management, and the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR). Tenants are demanding accountability and a halt to rent increases until housing standards improve. Kyla Raskin, a staff attorney at Brooklyn Legal Services, explained that the rent hikes occurred about a year ago without proper notice or due process for tenants. 'A lot of them weren't even notified about this process before it happened. They weren't told that the owner was applying for the increases,' Raskin stated. More: Latest News from Around the Tri-State In response to these issues, Raskin and her team are pursuing an Article 78 case in the Brooklyn Supreme Court. Their goal is clear: 'We're saying kind of go back, reverse these rent increases, and start to do your supervisory functions,' Raskin explained. The New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal declined to comment on the pending litigation. Similarly, when reached out for comment, the management company also declined to respond. As the legal battle unfolds, tenants like Assogba remain resolute in their fight for better living conditions: 'We live in Brooklyn, New York, Brownsville. I know it's rough, but nobody deserves to live like that'. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
23-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Proposed President's Park Apartments still drawing opposition
LEWISTON — Despite revisions to plans to be more accommodating, the seven-building, 210-unit President's Park Apartment complex from 5/4 Development is still drawing opposition from Lewistonians. Chief among them is the Fin, Feather, and Fur Conservation Society, or 3F Club, whose Swann Road property where they hunt comes right up against the boundaries for the apartments. Club President Tim Gunther reiterated their concern about violating the state's law preventing firearm discharge within 500 feet of a residence while also having concerns about the potential wildlife being harmed and the potential for noise disturbances. 'I appreciate that they're trying to move the building a little bit further from the property line; still, where we're hunting puts us in the 500-foot rule,' Gunther said at Thursday's Lewiston Planning Board meeting, adding the group may file an injunction to make sure their concerns are addressed. Other complaints from club members and town residents include the increased traffic on Route 18, whether the town's wastewater treatment plant can handle the additional water usage, and that these units would end up being subsidized housing despite the developer's attorney Jeff Palumbo saying they will be market-rate. Jeff Ritter, the Water Pollution Control Center administrator, said the plant could handle the amount of water coming from it on a normal day, estimated at 60,000 gallons. Building Inspector Timothy Masters said there have not been any official traffic studies done for this area. During a coordinated environmental review when this was first considered at 168 units, the Department of Transportation was asked for comment, which they said additional traffic would not be a concern. They were asked again for comment when the number of units changed to 210 and the response was the same. 5/4 Development is the latest to try and develop the land in question, with efforts going back to the 1980s. The President's Park Apartments project was first approved by the town in 2022 when it was first presented as 168 units, with no construction progress made since then. Developers Joe and Dave Giusiana have stated the increase to 210 units was needed in order for the $24 million project to make financial sense for them. The zoning board of appeals initially rejected the request for increased density, but after the developers filed an Article 78 appeal challenging that, they went to the town board directly who granted approval. The development would take up 11 acres of the 23.5-acre site, have 423 parking spaces, and community spaces near the development's center including a clubhouse, a pool, an enclosed playground, and two pickleball courts. Each building would be nearly 35 feet tall, 224 feet wide and 55 feet deep. Each of the three floors in them have eight two-bedroom units and two one-bedroom units totaling 12,164 square feet. Dave told the planners they are still looking for financial partners, suggesting that after the utilities and community building are built, they would start renting as each building gets constructed one at a time. It has to go through the planning board project again as the reworked development is considered a different one from what the planners initially approved. Among the 20 revisions 5/4 Development made since last presenting in December include moving water lines so they would go on the other side of the road, having the buildings at least 250 feet from the property line next to the 3F property, and having ponds on complex property. Utility company easements have not been discussed yet. Board Chairman William Burg emphasized this project is still in the concept plan stage, with more items like the traffic study and landscaping required in the future detailed plan. The planners did not take action on approving these plans, as Town Engineer Robert Lannon noted that since the town sees this as a new project, it has to go through parts 2 and 3 of the SEQR process before making a decision. Town Attorney Anthony Serianni recommended they not make a decision until at least next month's meeting.
