NYS Capitol (Mike Groll/Governor’s Office).
By Mark Chiusano
Being mayor of New York City comes with a lot of advantages, from the media-capital bully pulpit of the Big Apple to a built-in workforce that numbers over 300,000. But the uncomfortable secret of becoming mayor is that for lots of big swings, you need Albany.
That’s because of how much authority the state has over city issues, on aspects of taxation, housing, transportation, and even law enforcement. Yet the city is New York’s economic engine, and mayors often get the lion’s share of the press and glory. This dynamic has led to clashes between mayors and governors since time immemorial, punctuated by Bill de Blasio calling out Andrew Cuomo for his love of the “vendetta,” for example, or John Lindsay looking at secession from Nelson Rockefeller’s state.
The current crop of Democrats vying for mayor are well aware of the territory on this issue. In a mid-May forum hosted by the news publications New York Focus and Hell Gate, Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani talked about having to push then-Governor Cuomo for additional education funding, and raised the old saying that “the city is a creature of the state” — a power dynamic that Cuomo, now the Democratic mayoral primary frontrunner, knows quite well.
Former city Comptroller and State Assemblymember Scott Stringer agreed that in some ways, “you come to appreciate when you run for city office just how much the future of New York is really in Albany’s hands.”
Given how central state government will be to whoever wins the mayoralty this November, CityLand asked the Democratic primary candidates — three of whom are sitting state legislators — for their positions on some specific and thorny state-city issues, as well as for the headlines of their Albany agenda for policy or funding changes they may seek from the capital.
Respondents included former Assemblymember Michael Blake, City Comptroller Brad Lander, State Senator Zellnor Myrie, State Senator Jessica Ramos, Mamdani, and Stringer. (If Adrienne Adams, Whitney Tilson, or Cuomo responds, we’ll update this article. Former State Senator and now Mayor Eric Adams is a Democrat running as an independent in the general election.)
Cuomo, of course no stranger to Albany with more than ten years as governor, did not respond to questions for this article. Yet in some of his remarks during his campaign for mayor, he has taken positions counter to several of his administration’s actions, from bail reform to congestion pricing to pension policy.
MAYORAL CONTROL OF CITY SCHOOLS
When New York City mayors have gone hat in hand to Albany on recent “tin cup days,” one of the main asks has been an extension of mayoral control of city schools. This style of centralized governance for city education has been around since 2002, when then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg won the power from the state, though with an expiration date. It has been extended several times since, including twice during Mayor Adams’ tenure. When he was running for mayor, Adams said he thought mayoral control of city schools should have to be renewed by the state every two years, but he changed that position when he took office and sought a four-year extension (he got two years initially). When Cuomo was governor, he brokered deals extending mayoral control of schools, but often extracting his priorities (like an expansion of charter schools) while negotiating with the Legislature and de Blasio.
Stringer, Myrie, and Blake want to keep mayoral control of city schools. The candidates made similar arguments about how having the mayor in charge of education promotes accountability and “helps maintain a unified direction for education,” as explained by Myrie, who was a student in city schools before and after mayoral control.
Lander joined his colleagues in supporting the current system but said he would implement reforms such as requiring City Council “advice and consent to confirm the Chancellor” nominated by the mayor.
Ramos and Mamdani were the most skeptical of mayoral control. Ramos said she was “open to collaborating on an alternative arrangement that is co-created with educators, students, and parents.” Mamdani, meanwhile, supports “an end to mayoral control” in favor of a system of co-governance involving parents, students, educators and administrators. He proposes accomplishing this by strengthening current education stakeholder groups like the Panel for Educational Policy and school leadership teams.
HOUSING
In response to CityLand, all of the candidates floated Albany agendas with a major focus on housing development, with most also pressing for policies to aid homeowners and tenants.
For Lander, that includes partnering with the state to construct more supportive housing and legalize accessory dwelling units statewide.
Ramos highlighted capital support for workforce housing, and Stringer and Blake proposed modern Mitchell-Lama programs, namehecking the 1950s-era city-state initiative that created over 100,000 apartments for middle-income New Yorkers. It could “deliver deeply affordable housing for public servants, union members, and working families,” Blake suggested. (Lander has supported a renewed Mitchell-Lama as well.)
Among the more specific home ownership ideas were Stringer’s bid to raise the cap on down payment assistance programs and Lander’s proposal for more relief to low-income homeowners in the outer boroughs.
Many significant housing efforts in New York, a place where construction is always happening, nevertheless require a trip upstate. An enduring symbol of that imbalance is the Urstadt Law, which gives Albany the ultimate say over local rent regulation. This vestige of the 1970s, when the city’s housing stock was decaying, allowed many previously rent-regulated apartments to hit the private market for decades before state leaders strengthened the decontrol mechanisms in 2019. City politicians have often bemoaned this reality and sought to repeal Urstadt or gain more control. Stringer, Myrie, and Blake said they’d like to do just that, with Stringer arguing that the law “undermines the city’s ability and authority to meaningfully address the housing affordability crisis.”
Ramos said she was “willing to open that conversation with Albany” after fully funding “existing tenant protection infrastructure.”
THE MTA
On congestion pricing, the state-approved central business district tolling effort which went into effect early this year and is meant to reduce traffic and help pay for MTA capital projects, Lander, Mamdani, Myrie, Ramos, and Stringer are all in favor. The odd man out was Blake, who said the city must have “a reformed congestion pricing model that is fairer, more transparent, and better serves everyday New Yorkers.” (He has elsewhere said more specifically of congestion pricing that “we must lower the cost for New Yorkers.”)
More broadly, all of the responding candidates voiced support for a better-run or -funded MTA, and most want more mayoral control of mass transit in the city. The system is run by a board where a plurality of voting members as well as the chair are picked by the governor. The mayor gets four board appointees.
Myrie and Blake called for more of a city footprint at the MTA, with Myrie specifically supporting “a stronger voice in MTA planning so that capital investments align with the city’s goals for equity, economic mobility, and climate action.” Ramos said one of her top Albany priorities would be “claiming the ability to appoint the NYC Transit President,” who is the official in charge of city subways and buses.
Lander went furthest by saying he would work with the state to explore “unified control over New York City’s transportation systems,” meaning a single entity known as “Big Apple Transit” that would manage the city’s subways, buses, other surface transportation, and streets.
RED LIGHT CAMERAS
Another perennial example of how subordinate New York City is to Albany is the city’s decades-old red light cameras, which ticket drivers who blow through lights. The initiative has been credited with reducing fatalities, yet the mayor can’t simply put up the cameras where he or she pleases: Albany retains the power to authorize and size the program, which has, like speed cameras, been expanded in recent years.
Mamdani, Myrie, Blake, Ramos, and Stringer all support the cameras, with Blake adding the caveat that they should be “implemented equitably and transparently,” and Stringer nodding at privacy concerns when it comes to technological policing, which is why he sees the need for “an independent technology oversight board” to audit and monitor New York’s surveillance efforts. Lander has supported the use of the cameras, promising in his responses to CityLand to hold reckless drivers accountable and develop a data-driven street safety plan that would include red light and speed camera figures. (Lander himself has a history of parking and speeding tickets, a perennial topic in his recent runs for office.)
ALBANY AGENDAS AND THE UNEASY PARTNERSHIP
All the candidates have accumulated wish-lists for Albany on their websites and on the stump.
These include Mamdani’s call to raise income and corporate tax rates and enact free bus service; Stringer’s ask for $500 million from Albany for a Very Rainy Day Fund; Tilson’s promise to fight a state law mandating smaller class sizes in NYC; Myrie’s push for a state Office of Gun Violence Prevention; and a late-arriving set of policies from Cuomo like getting the governor to help raise the city minimum wage to $20 and infuse cash into the 485-x tax abatement program for housing developers.
Most of the contenders also have Albany experience or are well-versed in the complicated interplay between the two power centers in the Empire State.
Stringer and Myrie in particular nodded toward cooperation and good feelings ahead of the election, with Stringer saying he would “work closely with Governor Hochul to deliver for New York City” and Myrie noting that “strong collaboration between the city and state will be essential to keeping New York City affordable and ensuring that families can build their futures here.”
Lander said (correctly) that there is “inherent tension built into the dynamic that has manifested across several Mayors and Governors,” before arguing that he would forge a “constructive relationship” while “fiercely protecting the City’s needs.” To do so, he would turn to “coalition building” with the state legislators and other powerbrokers who have a say in the all-important $250 billion state budget – a group that includes some of his opponents in this race.
*****
Mark Chiusano is a Senior Fellow in New York Law School’s Center for New York City and State Law and the author of The Fabulist: The Lying, Hustling, Grifting, Stealing, and Very American Legend of George Santos.