Our Time PressThe Local Paper with the Global View

For years, there have been complaints about Albany’s “three men in a room” form of governance. Less discussed is the power of NYC’s Council Speaker.
According to several council members, the Council Speaker decides who chairs a council committee (and therefore receives a chair stipend), picks committee assignments and allocates discretionary budgets to each member.
Council members receive a capital budget (for infrastructure improvements in their district, such as park upgrades) and an expense budget. The expense budget includes $108 thousand for senior services, $151 thousand for youth services and a minimum of $80 thousand for discretionary purposes. Councilman Barron states that $80 thousand is the minimum, but some council members receive as much as $300-400 thousand or more. It is said that the amount of each council member’s discretionary budget is based not on need, but on the relationship with the Speaker. And supporting the Speaker’s agenda and ingenuity are the tools required to bring dollars back to a district.
The Council Speaker is the sole elected official making these decisions. The power of the Speaker was highlighted by the recent contentious council votes regarding co-naming 4 blocks on Gates Ave. after Sonny Abubadika Carson. It was the Speaker who decided she wanted Carson’s name removed from the list of street co-names throughout the city. Before and after the vote, there were allegations and assertions of the speaker using the power of her office to influence the vote by her ability to decide discretionary funds individual members could bring back to their districts.
How did things get this bad?
Prior to the 1980’s, NYC was guided by the old Board of Estimate. Questions around the concentration of decision-making power led to the establishment of the City Council. Local decisions, such as the desire to rename city streets, were diffused to the district level. A non-fixed portion of the city budget available for council use became reduced to an annual orgy of contention, as each council member advocated for additional funds for their district by currying favor from the Speaker.
The power of the Speaker presumably is regularly visited. At the beginning of each year, the council votes on rules of governance, including the powers of the speaker. In particular, 2001 saw 8 changes to the rules of governance in the City Council.
Apparently, these changes may not have been enough. As it stands, the Speaker makes multiple unilateral decisions, such as appointing council members as chair of various committees, with the commensurate “allowances” or “lulus” padding their salaries and controlling their agendas, appointing central staff as council to committees, thereby leaving chairpersons little independence or authority, and making final decisions regarding allocation of discretionary expense member items.
How did the council give the Speaker so much power? The NYC Charter (amended 2004) states, “The council shall determine the rules of its own proceedings at the first stated meeting of the council in each year and shall file a copy with the city clerk. Such rules shall include, but not be limited to, rules that the chairs of all standing committees be elected by the council as a whole.” How did choosing committee chairs go from group vote to the prerogative of the Speaker?
Decisions such as those regarding allocation of discretionary budgets for individual council members should not be decided by one person. That is not how American democracy is supposed to work. At least Albany has three in the room.
A better system would have a Speaker’s committee making such decisions, with the Speaker being the spokesperson for the committee. Such a committee with members reflecting the diversity of council districts may produce more democratic decisions based upon fairness, if not need.
The recent street co-naming fiasco has revealed the need for this type of change.
Barron asserts since the Speaker enjoys an apparently cordial working relationship with the mayor, she should use her power to advocate for $1 billion of the $59 billion city budget to be set aside for council use. Barron believes the perception of the Speaker’s ability to influence the mayor is greatly exaggerated. It is easier to be perceived as powerful by influencing a street co-naming request.
After the Carson vote, rumors swirled alleging many ‘no’ votes were currying the Speaker’s favor (to insure continuation of their member items), ‘yes’ votes were about principle, and abstentions were bet hedges.
According to a 1999 Village Voice article regarding then Speaker Peter Vallone, Sr., “before Vallone and the mayor shook hands on a budget deal, the Speaker appeared poised to pressure councilmembers into supporting his lead-paint scheme by threatening to take away their “member items”- money for projects in each council district that typically reward loyal constituents or pay for popular programs.”
Councilman Tony Avella, the only white to vote for the Vann Amendment, began his career by working in Vallone’s district office. As notorious as Speaker Vallone was, Avella says “my impression was that things did not operate the same [as now]. Under [speaker] Miller, [council operations] changed dramatically, became more political. Under Quinn, it has gotten worse.”
Try to get a complete list of City Council member items, each broken down by individual name, or district, for the current ’08 fiscal year, or any previous year. As of this date, you can’t.
Theoretically, this is public information, several council members say so.
A few years ago, Wayne Barrett, Village Voice veteran political reporter extraordinaire, “tried to find Una Clarke’s member items” when she was running for Owen’s congressional seat. The NYS Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) covers NYC. According to Barrett, until this date, the NYC Council has not complied with Wayne Barrett’s FOIL request regarding Una Clarke years ago. And Barrett was only asking for the member items of one council member.
What is the Council hiding? Why the absence of complete transparency?
If the NYC Council can get bogged down in the minutia of one street co-name (during budget negotiation time), why can’t it comply with the very public information laws it is required to uphold?
This writer tried to obtain member items by name and/or district.
The Mayor’s Public Information (PI) office referred me to the Speaker. The PI office of the Speaker told me I was asking a ‘technical’ budget question and they didn’t have that info. Calls to several councilmember offices revealed they did not have this information. The Office of Management and Budget publishes geographic budget information for various city agencies, such as fire, police, and sanitation, but it does not do the City Council.
It is sad to receive verbal stumbling blocks and stonewalls in response to a simple request for public information.
A Google search produced an arcane document called City Council Fiscal Year 2007 Adopted Expense Budget (aka Schedule C). Other years are also available. The 2007 Schedule C contains approximately 70 pages of non-profits and the council dollars they received. It does not contain the council districts they are located in, nor the council person whose member dollars they represent.
Wayne Barrett recalls trying to use this

The NYC 2008 budget was recently released ahead of schedule. Because of record increased tax revenues and cost savings based on “administrative adjustments”, NYC is flush with cash. In fact, NYC has a $4.4 billion surplus. This year’s budget may be the healthiest since the glory days of Mayor Lindsay.
Amazingly, we were not inundated with media reports speculating how the surplus is to be spent. We have not been bombarded with negotiation news, or rumors regarding favored programs to be rewarded.
What we were given is bait and switch distractions- Imus and a Council Speaker denying a community a mere street co-name.
During the contentious debates over Sonny Carson’s name, public attention was effectively taken away from negotiating for a fair share of the flush city budget.
Quinn’s so-called “strong (arm)” position against Carson’s name, the political process and the black community brought nationwide attention to the NYC Council. Yes, the council has the power to dismiss a community’s wishes. But what is Speaker Quinn hiding?
How can the council be so vociferously pro or con the Carson amendment yet maintain an established (although slightly amended) pattern of deafening silence with regard to its own expense budget member items?
How can any John or Jane Q. Public decide for him or herself if any council member’s vote on any bill (yea, nay or abstain) may be (c)overtly tainted by member-item funds dispensed by the speaker?
Does a council member represent his/ her constituency, or are they beholden to the largess of the Speaker?
God forbid the NYC Council is hiding what has been found on the state level: member-item fraud and mismanagement. Of more immediate concern is a citizen’s ability to access equitable distribution of member items across council districts.
According to Councilman Charles Barron, each council member is allotted both a capital and expense budget for their district. The capital budget varies from year to year and is based upon the requirements of individual projects. The expense budget has 3 components: seniors, youth and discretionary.
Reportedly each council member receives $108,000 for senior programs in their district. These funds come through the Dept. for the Aging (DFTA). Youth services are allocated $151,000, derived from the Dept. of Youth and Community Development (DYCD). Also each council member is allocated a discretionary expense budget (aka member items) with a base of $80,000. This discretionary expense budget can be as high as $300,000- 400,000 or more, depending on the council member.
Barron believes the system, which determines which council member receives how much, is inherently unfair. “The Speaker decides how much [discretionary member-item dollars] each council member gets. It is not based on need, but your relationship with the Speaker.”

Barron’s assertion, and numbers, was recently affirmed by Councilman Tony Avella (Queens) and the Gotham Gazette. Avella was the sole white to vote in favor of the Vann Amendment.
Councilman Avella states he and Barron are the two council members who consistently vote independently. Avella refuses “to sell my soul for a few thousand dollars for my district, and vote for a bad bill if in the end the entire city suffers.”
According to Avella, he consistently receives minimal member items for his district ever since he “voted against the property tax.” Avella states council members do not “feel free to vote what is right.” He continues: “It is very clear to those that are independent, those that vote their conscience get less money [for their district].”
Avella’s contention is reflected in the Gotham Gazette’s calculation of individually-sponsored member items for fiscal year 2008. Avella’s allocation is $67,607, compared to Weprin ($736,500) and Comrie ($710,857). Avella states these numbers are slightly inaccurate. However, he believes Quinn is being disingenuous when she touts the new format of this year’s Council Expense Budget as being transparent. Exact sponsorship of council member-items is hidden in allocations sponsored by multiple members. (These group sponsorships account for approximately 2/3 of the total council budget.) Avella believes, “If you follow the leadership blindly, you get more dollars for your district.”
The numbers are revealing.
Calculating the individual member items dollars the Speaker allocates by borough shows that the average member dollars per council person in Brooklyn is $139,649, less than half of Staten Island. Queens, Manhattan and the Bronx all received about $100,000 per council district more than Brooklyn. The explanation is simple and goes back to the council vote for speaker: the boroughs that supported Quinn for speaker are rewarded.
An absurd aside: Comrie, who received $710,857 for his district, is reported to claim his funding is based upon need. By Comrie’s logic, Mealy, who brought $59,000 to her district, and Eugene, who received $46,500, both represent central Brooklyn districts that do not have critical needs.
Another point of interest: the Brooklyn Delegation of the Black, Latin, and Asian Caucus did or did not bring in dollars to their respective districts based on a number of factors, including how they voted on Vann’s Carson amendment. Those that voted for the Carson Amendment, (Barron, Vann, Foster and Mealy), all received less than $140,000 for their districts. Those that voted against the amendment, or abstained, (except for Eugene) brought $140,000 or more back to their districts. Apparently, Eugene’s abstention did not help him.
Considering 2/3 of council member dollars in the 2008 Council Expense Budget are hidden in group sponsorships, the situation may be a lot worse than revealed by analysis of individually-sponsored member-items.
Responding to a question on how works in the council, Avella say “Council members are told how to vote [by the Speaker].” Referring to the Vann Amendment, Avella states, “The very fact that she is quoted as saying her position sends a message.” Avella says he did get a phone call from the Speaker’s office regarding the Vann Amendment. He admits he was not explicitly told how to vote, however he was given a reiteration of the Speaker’s position. According to Avella, “Anyone can read between the lines. This is regularly done [in order to get a desired vote].” Avella says other council members have told him off the record they are afraid to vote their conscience for fear of losing member dollars.
Allocation of member-item dollars is based upon several factors, including, borough delegations, key leadership positions, individual members, and the negotiation process. The final decisions, however, are made by the Speaker.
These are quotes from Speaker Quinn’s statement referring to Sonny Abubadika Carson prior to the vote regarding Councilman Vann’s amendment: “record is clear- he was a divisive individual,” “not an individual who sought to bring our city together,” “individual who in any shape or fashion has not lived up to the core values of the City of NY.”
Looking at the 2008 City Council Expense Budget, in which member items were inequitably distributed by Quinn, can any of these phrases apply to her?
On Tues. June 12, Speaker Quinn and Mayor Bloomberg reached a budget agreement. The full Council voted on the budget on Fri. June 15. The 2008 budget includes a surplus of $4.4 billion in a $59 billion budget. $2.3 billion is allocated to paydown of future expense and debt on 2009 and 2010. (Bloomberg will not be mayor in 2010.) Meanwhile, there are 9,000 less summer jobs for youth in 2008 than in 1999. A Police Athletic League program closed on June 25 in Councilwoman Mealy’s district.

By Mary Alice Miller

The beat of African drums, via cell phones and text messages, was urgent and intense.
About 6pm, June 21, Majida Abdul-Karim put out the call after she happened to witness officers from the 77th Precinct hit and arrest attorney Michael Tarif Warren and his wife, Evelyn.
At the time the calls went out, information was sketchy about the incident which occurred near the McDonald’s franchise on Atlantic and Vanderbilt. 
Less than an hour after the arrest, Majida was at the 77th Precinct.  Majida was at a garage at Vanderbilt and Atlantic when she “saw a situation with a man who had hit a car.” She said,  “This man jumped out of the car and proceeded to run. Once the police officers witnessed that, they drew their guns to go after the man. I looked behind them to see the outcome of what they did to the man, and I saw attorney Michael Warren being led into the [police] van, shirt open, tie really tight around his neck, and he was thrown into the vehicle.

I had to do a double take, because I didn’t know it was him. I spoke to him through the glass and asked him if there is anyone he wanted me to contact immediately. He gave me the number and I called a couple of people. Then someone said his wife is over there in the car. I ran to the car, and she was being written a summons by the police officer. She was a little upset while the officer was handing her the summons, she snatched it, and was told, ‘So, you want to snatch now?’, banged her up against the car, and said, ‘So now we are going to arrest you, too.’ That’s why I am here at the precinct.”
Word spread quickly. Radio station WBAI began announcing the breaking news as soon as they got word.
Less than an hour after the arrests, people had arrived at the 77th Precinct, and continued to come throughout the evening in support of the Warrens. Standing vigil was a wide variety of community folk, including representatives of December 12, Black Men’s Movement, BNYEE, NBUF and Roots Revisited.
Councilman Charles Barron and attorney Reginald Haley were allowed to talk to Michael Warren in the precinct, where they observed Warren’s bruised lips and face, and torn clothing.
Haley’s impressions after talking with Michael and Evelyn: “Obviously, she is upset. She saw her husband beaten and arrested. She was hit as well, and manhandled by the police. Long story short, they saw a man being arrested and beaten after he was handcuffed. They merely raised their objections; they did not attempt to intervene physically in any way.”
Haley continues, “It is really appalling that any citizen of the United States, especially an attorney, would be manhandled and beaten simply for raising an objection to someone else being beaten after they were handcuffed. Michael was beaten as well. He was punched several times in the face. What we are doing now is waiting and hoping to get him released tonight.”
Attorney Marisa Benton, as well as Barron and Haley, conferred with Evelyn Warren in the precinct. According to Benton, Evelyn was “in shock.” You could see that she felt violated, as a result of being punched in the face by an officer (her chin was visibly bruised), and being arrested. Benton stated Evelyn was “in disbelief over what has taken place and what she witnessed. It just seems like a classic case of police brutality. Apparently, there was some man who was being brutalized by the police, and a large crowd gathered and Michael and Evelyn had stopped to inquire what was happening because it looked like clear police misconduct. So, I guess they were asserting their rights as citizens to inquire and the police officers didn’t appreciate it. And they began to hit Michael Warren. And his wife was also hit. I still haven’t heard a lawful basis [for the police] to approach Michael and Evelyn. And I still haven’t heard a lawful basis for the arrests. I am dumbfounded as to what led to them being arrested.”

Meanwhile, people kept coming. Observers filled the precinct’s reception area, the overflow spilling onto the steps and into the street. Approximately 200 people showed up.
Kevin Powell on why he came to the 77th Precinct Thursday evening: “I have known Michael Warren for 15 years or so. He’s been a longtime supporter of a lot of us in the community. He has been a victim of police brutality; he’s been a victim of a lot of things that happen in the community. When I heard about this, I got the text [message], I said, ‘I have to go support the brother and his wife.’ I think it is unfortunate what is going on with them. I know he is already under the people’s radar because of the work that he does. We want to make sure that he gets due justice here, and that’s why we are going to sit here and make sure that that happens.”
At about 11pm, Michael and Evelyn Warren were released; Evelyn with no charges, Michael with a desk-appearance ticket. Michael’s trilogy of charges is obstructing governmental administration, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. The desk-appearance court date has not yet been released.
After the release, Michael Warren, Councilman Barron, attorney Roger Wareham and Marq Claxton (100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care) were guests on WBAI, and all of last Sunday’s Black Talk Radio broadcasts.
Warren, an experienced defense counsel, could not go into detail regarding the particulars of what happened to him because of pending legal proceedings. He did talk about what made him stop his car that evening. Warren said he saw a young man being chased by a group of police officers. He said it looked like a National Geographic documentary in which the predators were aggressively chasing their prey. Warren said the look he saw on the man’s face was one he had never seen before- a look of palpable fear. Warren said he saw the officers tackle the young man and place him in handcuffs. While this man was lying facedown on the ground, Warren said he saw supervisor Sgt. Talvey kick the handcuffed young man in the head, step back, and then Talvey watched while his police officer/ staff mimicked their supervisor’s behavior.
Barron and Wareham describe what happened to Warren: Michael then got out of his car, imploring the officers to “stop beating the man, you already have him in handcuffs, just put him through the system.”
The officers involved answered with a few choice expletives, telling Warren to mind his business. When Warren identified himself as an attorney, the officers said, “we don’t care who the **** you are.”
Warren retreated, got back in his car, and began to take notes. After the officers finished with the man they had arrested, they approached Warren’s car, dragged him out, punched him in the face and mouth, and arrested him, with his wife watching.
Traumatized at witnessing how her husband was being treated, Evelyn asked why the officer was treating her husband that way, the officer swung past Michael and hit Evelyn in the jaw.
The beatings and arrests of Michael and Evelyn Warren prompted local black-elected officials to hold a press conference last Sunday at City Hall. In attendance were Council members Letitia James, Darlene Mealy, Matthew Eugene, Robert Jackson and Helen Foster; State Senators Velmanette Montgomery and Eric Adams, as well as Assemblymen Hakeem Jeffries and Nick Perry, and also Rev. Conrad Tillard.  They all expressed outrage at NYC’s “out of control” police force.
Later that day, a rally was held in front of the 77th Precinct. About 300 people attended. Although most of the elected officials at the press conference promised to show up at the rally, only Nick Perry actually did.
A wide variety of community leaders spoke at the rally, including Ron Daniels, Viola Plummer, Bob Law and others.
A follow-up strategizing meeting for organization representatives will be held at Sista’s Place Monday, July 2.

Danielle Douglas

Despite a defeat in the City Council, East New York City Councilman Charles Barron led a small group of activists in the renaming of Gates Ave. in Bedford-Stuyvesant to Sonny Abubadika Carson Ave. on Saturday, June 16.
Met with little resistance from the police, who watched from inside paddy wagons, Barron and members of the December 12th Movement placed official-looking stickers with Carson’s name over the smaller Gates’ signs where the street intersects with Nostrand Ave. “We chose to go the right route; we were going to do it this way originally. So when the City Council said no, we said we have a right to self-determination as a people so we are
going to put up the sign anyway,” says Barron.
The councilman says, “If they take it down, Sonny Abubadika Carson is in the
minds and in the hearts of our people, it’s not in the sign. So every time
they take it down we are going to put it back up.”
Repeated calls to the head of the City Council, Christine Quinn, were not
returned. A month ago, the councilwoman was in the center of the firestorm
that ensued after she urged the council to reject the name change, suggesting that Carson was a divisive racist. Barron argues that the only one who is being divisive is Quinn. “She has been more divisive than Sonny Carson had ever been in his life. She divided the City Council down the
line; 24 whites said no and 15 people of color voting yes. The council has
never been this divisive in its history.”

By Mary Alice Miller

The beat of African drums, via cell phones and text messages, was urgent and intense.
About 6pm, June 21, Majida Abdul-Karim put out the call after she happened to witness officers from the 77th Precinct hit and arrest attorney Michael Tarif Warren and his wife, Evelyn.
At the time the calls went out, information was sketchy about the incident which occurred near the McDonald’s franchise on Atlantic and Vanderbilt. 
Less than an hour after the arrest, Majida was at the 77th Precinct.  Majida was at a garage at Vanderbilt and Atlantic when she “saw a situation with a man who had hit a car.” She said,  “This man jumped out of the car and proceeded to run. Once the police officers witnessed that, they drew their guns to go after the man. I looked behind them to see the outcome of what they did to the man, and I saw attorney Michael Warren being led into the [police] van, shirt open, tie really tight around his neck, and he was thrown into the vehicle. I had to do a double take, because I didn’t know it was him. I spoke to him through the glass and asked him if there is anyone he wanted me to contact immediately. He gave me the number and I called a couple of people. Then someone said his wife is over there in the car. I ran to the car, and she was being written a summons by the police officer. She was a little upset while the officer was handing her the summons, she snatched it, and was told, ‘So, you want to snatch now?’, banged her up against the car, and said, ‘So now we are going to arrest you, too.’ That’s why I am here at the precinct.”
Word spread quickly. Radio station WBAI began announcing the breaking news as soon as they got word.
Less than an hour after the arrests, people had arrived at the 77th Precinct, and continued to come throughout the evening in support of the Warrens. Standing vigil was a wide variety of community folk, including representatives of December 12, Black Men’s Movement, BNYEE, NBUF and Roots Revisited.
Councilman Charles Barron and attorney Reginald Haley were allowed to talk to Michael Warren in the precinct, where they observed Warren’s bruised lips and face, and torn clothing.
Haley’s impressions after talking with Michael and Evelyn: “Obviously, she is upset. She saw her husband beaten and arrested. She was hit as well, and manhandled by the police. Long story short, they saw a man being arrested and beaten after he was handcuffed. They merely raised their objections; they did not attempt to intervene physically in any way.”
Haley continues, “It is really appalling that any citizen of the United States, especially an attorney, would be manhandled and beaten simply for raising an objection to someone else being beaten after they were handcuffed. Michael was beaten as well. He was punched several times in the face. What we are doing now is waiting and hoping to get him released tonight.”
Attorney Marisa Benton, as well as Barron and Haley, conferred with Evelyn Warren in the precinct. According to Benton, Evelyn was “in shock.” You could see that she felt violated, as a result of being punched in the face by an officer (her chin was visibly bruised), and being arrested. Benton stated Evelyn was “in disbelief over what has taken place and what she witnessed. It just seems like a classic case of police brutality. Apparently, there was some man who was being brutalized by the police, and a large crowd gathered and Michael and Evelyn had stopped to inquire what was happening because it looked like clear police misconduct. So, I guess they were asserting their rights as citizens to inquire and the police officers didn’t appreciate it. And they began to hit Michael Warren. And his wife was also hit. I still haven’t heard a lawful basis [for the police] to approach Michael and Evelyn. And I still haven’t heard a lawful basis for the arrests. I am dumbfounded as to what led to them being arrested.”
Meanwhile, people kept coming. Observers filled the precinct’s reception area, the overflow spilling onto the steps and into the street. Approximately 200 people showed up.
Kevin Powell on why he came to the 77th Precinct Thursday evening: “I have known Michael Warren for 15 years or so. He’s been a longtime supporter of a lot of us in the community. He has been a victim of police brutality; he’s been a victim of a lot of things that happen in the community. When I heard about this, I got the text [message], I said, ‘I have to go support the brother and his wife.’ I think it is unfortunate what is going on with them. I know he is already under the people’s radar because of the work that he does. We want to make sure that he gets due justice here, and that’s why we are going to sit here and make sure that that happens.”
At about 11pm, Michael and Evelyn Warren were released; Evelyn with no charges, Michael with a desk-appearance ticket. Michael’s trilogy of charges is obstructing governmental administration, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. The desk-appearance court date has not yet been released.
After the release, Michael Warren, Councilman Barron, attorney Roger Wareham and Marq Claxton (100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care) were guests on WBAI, and all of last Sunday’s Black Talk Radio broadcasts.
Warren, an experienced defense counsel, could not go into detail regarding the particulars of what happened to him because of pending legal proceedings. He did talk about what made him stop his car that evening. Warren said he saw a young man being chased by a group of police officers. He said it looked like a National Geographic documentary in which the predators were aggressively chasing their prey. Warren said the look he saw on the man’s face was one he had never seen before- a look of palpable fear. Warren said he saw the officers tackle the young man and place him in handcuffs. While this man was lying facedown on the ground, Warren said he saw supervisor Sgt. Talvey kick the handcuffed young man in the head, step back, and then Talvey watched while his police officer/ staff mimicked their supervisor’s behavior.
Barron and Wareham describe what happened to Warren: Michael then got out of his car, imploring the officers to “stop beating the man, you already have him in handcuffs, just put him through the system.”
The officers involved answered with a few choice expletives, telling Warren to mind his business. When Warren identified himself as an attorney, the officers said, “we don’t care who the **** you are.”
Warren retreated, got back in his car, and began to take notes. After the officers finished with the man they had arrested, they approached Warren’s car, dragged him out, punched him in the face and mouth, and arrested him, with his wife watching.
Traumatized at witnessing how her husband was being treated, Evelyn asked why the officer was treating her husband that way, the officer swung past Michael and hit Evelyn in the jaw.
The beatings and arrests of Michael and Evelyn Warren prompted local black-elected officials to hold a press conference last Sunday at City Hall. In attendance were Council members Letitia James, Darlene Mealy, Matthew Eugene, Robert Jackson and Helen Foster; State Senators Velmanette Montgomery and Eric Adams, as well as Assemblymen Hakeem Jeffries and Nick Perry, and also Rev. Conrad Tillard.  They all expressed outrage at NYC’s “out of control” police force.
Later that day, a rally was held in front of the 77th Precinct. About 300 people attended. Although most of the elected officials at the press conference promised to show up at the rally, only Nick Perry actually did.
A wide variety of community leaders spoke at the rally, including Ron Daniels, Viola Plummer, Bob Law and others.
A follow-up strategizing meeting for organization representatives will be held at Sista’s Place Monday, July 2.