1.23.18 – NYSD 17 member speaks with Felder staffer on voting reform legislation

Jess Byrne, an NYSD 17 member and an SD 17 resident, provided the following summary (in italics) of a meeting she had on 1.23.18 with Bryan Best, State Sen. Felder’s Legislative Director:

On 1/23/18, members of the Brooklyn Voters Alliance, as part of the Let NY Vote coalition, met with Bryan Best to discuss voting reforms such as Early Voting, Same-Day registration, and Automatic Voter Registration.

The meeting was constructive, and Mr. Best asked good questions about the proposed reforms, the bills that have been introduced, and the budget lines that support them. Mr. Best said that he would discuss the reforms with Mr. Felder, and commented how Early Voting would be helpful to him personally.

More information from this blog about voting rights legislation being considered in Albany can be found here.

— Posted on 1.24.18 by JVS, backdated to 1.23.18

7.21.17 – Audio: NYSD 17 for Progress Meets with Sen. Felder

On July 20, four members of NYSD 17 for Progress met with Sen. Simcha Felder at his district office in Brooklyn. An audio recording of the meeting is available here and embedded below:

The four NYSD 17 members at the meeting were David Goldberg, Lisa Melilli, Jessica Byrne and Blake Morris, all of whom live in the Senate’s 17th District.

Sen. Felder was joined at the meeting by legislative aid Bryan Best, communications director Avi Fertig, and Chief of Staff Rodney Powis.

Among the topics discussed at the meeting were the following:

(1) Felder said he is dropping Senate Bill 5170A, which would raise the speed limit on Ocean Parkway to 35 miles per hour (conversation starts approximately 39:20 into the recording):

“I thought a lot about that bill as a result of different feedback,” he said. “I’ve spoken to people personally and I’ve decided to drop the bill.”

(2) Felder spoke of his opposition to a proposal to expand the city’s speed camera program (approximately 41:15 into the recording):

“The camera issue goes back to the Bloomberg administration…When the Bloomberg administration proposed cameras, I didn’t like the idea…I felt that on one side, you have the privacy issues, on the other side, I felt that the most compelling issue is that around the schools, most of the schools don’t have the security they need when you talk about cameras, about people being able to come into the schools. I believe even the public schools – I’m not talking about having police officers roaming the halls, but we live in a different time…The resource officers in front of the schools, I just feel philosophically is just not enough…So originally, when the proposal came up, they said that they were going to be near schools. If you see where the cameras are actually placed, yes, there is a school somewhere about a third of a mile, I forgot the exact number of blocks, near the school, but they’re not at the schools, they’re somewhere in the vicinity of the schools…The original proposal was the same thing. It was supposed to be cameras for the safety of children…The original proposal to get these cameras, the selling point was the safety, and then when you looked at the details, it said it would be within a certain amount of blocks away. To me, that’s a money grab. That was a money grab…Now that doesn’t mean that there aren’t any streets that are four or five blocks away where children cross that it’s not safe. All I’m suggesting to you is that, if they want to put cameras, first of all, put cameras on the schools themselves. I’m talking about terrorism that I’m concerned about, to protect the children that are in the school…But now the city proposal, the recent proposal, was within a half a mile away from the school. So all I’m suggesting to you is, now we’re talking about a philosophical debate as to whether you should have mobile cameras moving around to encourage safety. Now the issue is not about children, it’s about a philosophical debate whether you think you should have cameras roaming, moving, moving, moving to encourage people not to speed. Philosophically, I believe that if you really wanted to make sure people change their behavior, you ticket them with points. A police officer pulls you over…I’m not telling you a 50 dollar ticket doesn’t hurt, but a 50 dollar, 90 dollar ticket, somebody who’se comfortable, I’ll just say, who’se wealthy, if they’re in a rush for an appointment, a 90 dollar ticket is nothing. So what?…When a police officer pulls you over, and you get points on your license, that sticks, period. There’s nothing like it. So that’s what that’s all about.”

(3) Felder said he won’t host town hall meetings, as requested by NYSD 17, and explained why (approximately 1:30 into the recording):

“I think that almost without exception, I’ll have as many town hall meetings in your neighborhood where you live as I do throughout the rest of the district, which is none. I don’t do town hall meetings. I understand your interest. I’m willing to meet with as many constituents as they want, as often as they want. I don’t find [town hall meetings] productive. I find that when people have serious issues, if the purpose is really to discuss the issues, usually having a smaller group [works better]…If you watch the recent town hall meetings that different officials have had, including the mayor, these are pre-determined, pre-scheduled, pre-ordained…Who asks the questions, they decide beforehand, they decide who gets invited. So i’m not in the business of putting on a show. Now, i’m not telling you that it is impossible to have a town hall meeting that’s productive. All I’m suggesting to you is, this is my philosophy. I’ve been doing things this way since I was in office.”

Regarding a recent town hall put on by Councilman David Greenfield and Mayor Bill de Blasio, Felder said (approximately 11:50 into the recording):

“That to me is a joke. I compliment Councilman Greenfield. I think that the mayor and both of them are doing a lot of good things. But when I said before that town hall meetings are pre-determined, who’se going to speak, what they’re going to talk about, who’se invited, that’s [a] perfect example. I’m not interested in putting on a show.”

(4) Felder said he aims to be as responsive to constituents as possible, including those who disagree with him (approximately 20 minutes into the recording):

“I just want to be clear that I take pride in not only writing back, calling back…And people know that when people disagree with positions that I have, I call back…I spend a lot of time explaining what my position is. Most of the time, people will say thanks for calling back. We still are not happy that you disagree with us. But one thing I want to make sure that’s clear is that I try to the best of my ability to respond.”

(5) Felder said that he wants to help people register to vote, and would be willing to discuss legislation to automatically register voters in New York, but can’t support such a measure at this time (approximately 54:45 into the recording):

“I have mixed feelings about sort of, not necessarily this, but the impact of imposing something on somebody, even though it’s good. I can’t tell you that I have a clear, I have mixed feelings, I really do…I don’t know if I can really feel good on imposing something, even if you can opt-out…But in general about registering voters, my interest in public service, the first thing I did many moons ago was I was involved in just trying to register people to vote, period.”

(5) Felder said he prioritizes constituent services, including the bag fee bill (approximately 6:10 into the recording):

“The quality of life issues is a priority. Even when it comes to legislation. I try to pick a few things to get done in a  session, because usually you can’t, unfortunately, get that much done. I try to pick a few things and try to work on those. And usually the things that I pick on have to do with quality of life or individual issues.”

This also applied to the bag fee bill, he said: “That’s another example to me, whether you agree or not, is something that affects people in their day to day lives. That to me is a passion.”

(6) Felder explained why his office doesn’t always comment on legislation (approximately 14:55 into the recording):

“If I don’t have a position, I don’t discuss it, and if I do, I do. I don’t understand this part of the interrogation. When I have positions on things, I’m very vociferous about them. When I don’t, I don’t.”

On a related note, he said he’s very careful taking positions on legislation, because he wants to make sure he’s thought things through and consulted with experts (approximately 22:35 into the recording):

“For many many years, going back to my City Council days…I had advocated for medicinal marijuana. I was very passionate about [it], for a variety of reasons. When it came to the committee vote, after listening to hours and hours of testimony from different people, I wound up voting no in committee on medicinal marijuana, and the most compelling argument, which I had never thought about, never heard about, came from one of the witnesses…It was heart-wrenching…I don’t like being wrong…And that’s why I don’t like taking positions unless I am really pushing a piece of legislation.”

– Posted by John V. Santore

6.19.17 – Constituent told Felder has no stance on New York Health Act, voting rights legislation

A constituent named Natasha sent the following email to Felder Tracker summarizing a recent call she made to Sen. Felder’s office:

I called Felder’s Albany office on Friday 6/16 and said that I had called before and wanted to check on Felder’s position on the NY Health Act and the voting reform bills in committee before the end of the legislative session. The staffer told me that it isn’t Felder’s practice to take a position on a bill while it’s in committee. I replied that Felder’s constituents are eager to hear his views, and I said that I was getting calls from friends from outside the district who couldn’t understand why Felder was holding up the Health Act. The staffer was unsympathetic –
in fact, I would say he was a bit testy.

– Posted by John V. Santore

6.16.17 – Constituent questions re: New York Health Act, voting reform, Liberty Act, and Reproductive Health Act

On 6.16.17, SD 17 constituent Naomi Rabeeya sent an email to State Sen. Felder’s office requesting comment on four major legislative initiatives introduced in the State Senate: the New York Health Act, the Liberty Act, the Reproductive Health Act, and Early Voting (S2950) and Electronic Poll Books (S2788) legislation.

A response was not received. Rabeeya’s email is below:

From: Naomi Rabeeya <——@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 11:10 AM
Subject: Follow-up on calls and emails
To: felder@nysenate.gov

Hello Senator Felder,

I both called and emailed to ask your support/ask where you stand on the below issues on the following dates:

June 2- New York Health Act
June 5-Voting Reform
June 6-Liberty Act
June 7-Reproductive Health Act

I have yet to hear from you.

It is only fair to know where our elected officials stand on issues, and true leadership, takes a person who does research on issues, listens and speaks to constituents. A leader strives for effective government working with peers to do what is best for the people, not just the individual politician or his or her district.

I find it frightening that your stance on many issues is not clear to constituents, your staff does not seem to know where you stand or give us genetic answers that you will review a given issue, but rarely reply. The replies are often vague.

A large part of leadership is about clear communication.

Please support the below and please let the constituents know where you stand. We have a right to this information regardless of whether or not the below end up on the Senate floor.

I would also hope you show leadership in getting the below to the Senate floor if it is in your power to do so.

Society is better is we are all empowered. You are in the unique position to help empower all New Yonkers.

Best Regards,
Naomi

— Posted on 12.24.17, backdated to 6.16.17

6.15.17 – Email from Sen. Felder addresses voting rights, health care and reproductive rights legislation

On June 14, Gerald Cook, a member of NY State District 17 for Progress, received the following email from Sen. Felder’s office:

Dear Gerald,

Thank you for contacting me to share your support for the following legislative measures; S4840, S2788, S2796, S2950, and S5114. It was a pleasure to hear from you and I appreciate your kind words of support.

As you may know, the New York Health Act (Senate Bill 4840) is currently under review in the Senate Health Committee. This legislation would completely change how health care operates in New York State. No other state in the entire country has ever successfully implemented a proposal like this and I believe that legislation of this magnitude needs to be properly vetted by the Senate Health Committee. I would like to hear publically from experts and stakeholders on how a program like this would be implemented and the potential impacts it will have on the health care options of New York State residents.

Also under review in the Senate Health Committee is S2796, the Reproductive Health Act. The chair of the Health Committee sets the agenda and I will be sure to share your support for this measure with him.

S.2788 and S.2950 are currently under review in the Senate Rules Committee and S.5114 is under review in the Senate Elections Committee. Please know that I am not a member of those committees, but I will review the recommendations from those Committees with interest. Voting is a fundamental principle of our democracy and I am committed to seeing that our electoral process is conducted with the utmost integrity.

Once again thank you for contacting me and please let me know whenever I can be of assistance to you or your family.

Sincerely,
Simcha Felder
Senator, 17th District

– Posted by John V. Santore

6.15.17 – Notes from meeting with Felder staffer on voting rights, Liberty Act and constituent engagement

On June 13, Bryan Best, a legislative aide to Sen. Felder, met with Jessica Byrne, a member of NY State District 17 for Progress and the Brooklyn Voters Alliance, and Amanda Richie, also with the Brooklyn Voters Alliance. Ms Byrne recorded the following notes on the meeting:

(1) Concerning the Early Voting (S2950) and Electronic Poll Books (S2788) legislation before the Senate:  
– Best said that Mr. Felder supports “high voter turn-out and voter participation in elections.”
– The legislation could still change, Best said, and therefore Mr. Felder has yet to take a position on it. However, “he is not a hard no” if these bills make it to the floor, and will vote with the majority in the Senate.
– Best said that Mr. Felder “has respect” for State Sen. Fred Akshar, who chairs the Senate’s Elections Committee and is the lead sponsor of S2788.
– Best said he will ask Mr. Felder to ask Sen. Flanagan to move these bills to the floor for a vote. The bills are currently in the Senate’s Rules Committee.
– Best also shared a personal experience with voting challenges. He once had a school board election to vote for, he said, and he almost didn’t make it to the polls in time because he had to work late.

(2) Regarding the New York State Liberty Act:
– Best said he personally did not recall meeting with anyone on this legislation in the past.
– Best said he anticipated meeting with someone later in the week about the bills.
– Best said he personally had no knowledge of, and no position on, this bill.

(3) Regarding holding a meeting with NY District 17 for Progress: 
– Best said that Mr. Felder has said, “I want to meet with (them),” meaning the group, but suggested that the meeting would take place after the legislative session ends.

(4) Regarding constituent communication:
– Best asked what would be the most effective way to communicate with constituents. He asked if more emails would be helpful. Byrne said that constituents needed to hear more from Mr. Felder directly.

– Posted by John V. Santore based on notes by Jessica Byrne

6.9.17 – Meeting scheduled on voting rights legislation

Members of NY State 17th District for Progress and the Brooklyn Voters Alliance said Friday that a meeting has been scheduled with Felder staffer Bryan Best focused on voting rights legislation before the State Senate.

The meeting with take place in Albany on June 13, and will deal with three bills:

  • S2950 – “Relates to early voting; provides that beginning the eighth day prior to any election and ending on and including the second day prior to the election a person duly registered and eligible to vote shall be permitted to vote.”
  • S2788 – “Authorizes counties to employ computer generated registration lists; updates the list of supplies to be delivered to poll sites.”
  • S5114 – “Establishes an electronic registration process integrated within designated agency applications; makes related provisions.”

As of this week, Mr. Felder had yet to take a public position on the legislation.

This blog will be updated with notes from the meeting.

– Posted by John V. Santore

6.8.17 – Meeting requested on voting rights legislation

On June 8, NYSD 17 constituents Jessica Byrne and Blake Morris requested a meeting with Sen. Felder on three bills related to voting rights in New York:

  • S2950 – “Relates to early voting; provides that beginning the eighth day prior to any election and ending on and including the second day prior to the election a person duly registered and eligible to vote shall be permitted to vote.”
  • S2788 – “Authorizes counties to employ computer generated registration lists; updates the list of supplies to be delivered to poll sites.”
  • S5114 – “Establishes an electronic registration process integrated within designated agency applications; makes related provisions.”

As of this week, Mr. Felder had yet to take a public position on the bills.

Byrne and Morris submitted their meeting request on behalf of NY State 17th District for Progress, and in conjunction with a representative of the Brooklyn Voters Alliance. The request offered the following purpose for the meeting:

“We would like to meet with Senator Felder and/ or members of his staff to discuss legislation that would increase voter participation in S.D. 17, where voter registration and voter turnout are extremely low. There are a myriad of voting reform bills that have been introduced, and we would like to discuss the ones which benefit our district, and get some feedback on what kind of voting reforms Senator Felder feels would benefit his constituents.”

This blog will be updated with any response received.

– Posted by John V. Santore

6.8.17 – Felder has no stated position on major health care, reproductive rights, voting rights, immigration, or Trump tax return legislation

On June 8, John V. Santore, a constituent in New York’s 17th Senate district, called Sen. Felder’s office in Albany to ask if Mr. Felder had taken a public position on any the following bills:

S4840, the New York Health Act
S4075, the New York State Liberty Act
S2950 (regarding early voting)
S2788 (regarding computerized registration lists)
S5114 (regarding electronic registration)
S5572, forcing the release of Donald Trump’s state tax returns
S2796, the Reproductive Health Act

The Albany staffer who answered the phone said that Mr. Felder did not have a position as of that time on the above bills.

Santore then sent the below email to Mr. Felder’s staff. This blog will be updated with any response received.

I called the Albany office earlier today concerning these bills, and was told that Mr. Felder does not have a position on the above legislation. As a constituent, I find this troubling, considering that these bills would impact many, if not all, of his constituents, either directly or indirectly.

Based on what the office has thus far shared, I’m left to conclude one of the following three things:

1) That Mr. Felder is unaware of these bills.
2) That he is aware of the bills, but does not believe them to be significant enough to merit further consideration.
3) That he does have a position on the bills, but is unwilling to share that position, or share his thinking on them.

Any of these scenarios leaves me as a constituent to wonder what Mr. Felder’s principles are concerning key legislative issues of the day, and what his analytical process is when considering legislation. Whether Mr. Felder is against or for the above bills – or if he has questions about them he needs answered before he takes a position – I’d like to be informed of such, so that I can have a better sense of who Mr. Felder is as a legislator.

– Posted by John V. Santore

6.5.17 – Constituent calls on voting rights legislation (and one on the NYHA)

The following emails were sent in by 17th district constituents. In the emails, the constituents recounted their June 5 calls to Sen. Felder’s office concerning voting rights legislation currently before the Senate. The specific bills in question are:

  • S2950 – “Relates to early voting; provides that beginning the eighth day prior to any election and ending on and including the second day prior to the election a person duly registered and eligible to vote shall be permitted to vote.”
  • S2788 – “Authorizes counties to employ computer generated registration lists; updates the list of supplies to be delivered to poll sites.”
  • S5114 – “Establishes an electronic registration process integrated within designated agency applications; makes related provisions.”

(1) An email from constituent David Goldberg:

“Reached Darlene. Said they had been receiving a lot of calls about S2950, S2788, and S5114. Put me on hold briefly to ask the legislative director if Felder had a position. Came back and said that they had been receiving a lot of calls this morning about these bills and the legislative director intended to talk to Senator Felder about them and ask him his feelings, but that the Senator was in conference. She said that the legislative director would definitely bring up these voter registration bills to the Senator.”

(2) An email from constituent Ellen Bilofsky: 

“I talked to Bryan in the Albany office. He said he doesn’t know the senator’s position on the voting rights bills. Today is the first time they’ve gotten calls on the issue. The Senator may have a position, but he doesn’t know it, but he would be happy to pass on my request for the senator to support it. I gave him some reasons to support the three measures and mentioned how embarrassing it is to be the second lowest district in the state on voter registration and participation in elections. He asked for my name and phone number. I gave him my name but asked why I should give him my phone number when I’ve left it a number of times and no one ever calls me back. He said “Fair enough,” and said he would pass on my message.”

(3) An email from constituent Katie Mohrhauser, who asked about both the NY Health Act and the voting rights legislation: 

“I spoke with Darlene. She punted on the NY Health Act. Said Felder wasn’t the one holding it up in committee. She wasn’t familiar with the senator’s position but she believes he wants more vetting in committee. I pressed but couldn’t get much more. I ask what constituents can do to help the Senator reach a conclusion on this live-or-death issue. Nothing.”

“On voting, she said that today is the first day getting calls on voting. She said the legislative director plans to meet with Felder on these 3 bills. I shared a personal anecdote about my vote not counting and said that I support these measures. I told her that I was a part of a group of like-minded individuals who are trying to reach our elected representative. I suggested a town hall or small group meeting on individual issues.”

– Posted by John V. Santore