Before any Democrat reads further, no I am not referring to President Bush.
The end is near for him, though according to most polls, not nearly soon enough for the overwhelming majority of the country.
The president to whom I am referring is actually not one person, but five, namely the borough presidents of Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Staten Island and the Bronx. It has been widely rumored that outgoing Mayor Michael Bloomberg, in a move to further streamline government, is considering recommending a revision to the City Charter, which would eliminate the position of borough president. While no decisions have been made and the billionaire Bloomberg is for once not omnipotent, there is a distinct possibility that the position may be eliminated.
Amid speculation that Bloomberg may be considering a run for governor in 2010, many in political circles believe the mayor is poised to permanently change the structure of local government. Though tricky, such a move is not impossible or unprecedented. Until 1989, borough presidents sat on the powerful Board of Estimate and enjoyed authority over all land use and budgetary issues. But in that year, a City Charter revision abolished the Board of Estimate and divided its power between the City Council and mayor, relegating borough presidents to an almost entirely advisory position. The authority of borough presidents was further diminished in 2002, when the mayor disbanded the Board of Education, one of the few remaining panels to which the presidents appointed members.
Today, the mandate of borough presidents is quite limited, including only the statutory authority to appoint community board members, issue advisory opinions on land use items, make budget recommendations for their boroughs and operate a topographical office to construct official maps.
However, their operating budgets remain substantial relative to their assigned duties, which is a concern to fiscal watchdogs. Collectively, their offices employ a staff of 330 people working under a budget of just over $20 million. Irrespective of the criticism they receive as a waste of public money, borough presidents play an important role in local government and should be retained, but with greater responsibilities commensurate with the budgets they enjoy.
Each of the city’s boroughs is populated, diverse and complex enough to be one of the country’s largest cities on its own; and each has unique needs, wants and vision. If given the proper authority, borough presidents can take a leading role in making that vision a reality.
With a landscape dominated by corporate and institutional giants, owners and developers, borough presidents are often the voice of small businesses, commuters, working class families and both children and the elderly. They can empower neighborhoods and communities, playing a key role in the city’s system of checks and balances and neutralize the growth of cold, uncaring bureaucracies.
Critics contend that today, many residents rely on the city’s 3-1-1 system to answer questions that were previously the domain of borough presidents’ offices. However, while the system is a modern marvel for constituent care, there is no follow-up by 3-1-1 workers to see if the public actually reached the proper department and had their problem resolved. Expanding the constituent service capabilities of borough presidents as an adjunct to the 3-1-1 system would be a well-served use of their time and personnel.
When it comes to creating affordable housing and job opportunities, revitalizing neighborhoods and executing valuable safety and educational initiatives, the borough presidents’ offices can become important partners in a more responsive and efficient government. City services such as Meals on Wheels, sanitation, public transportation and infrastructural repair improve the public’s quality of life, yet are often left unrealized. If given the mandate, borough presidents have the ability to administer these services with marked effectiveness.
Having government bodies with different perspectives and opinions is not an enemy of efficiency because government is not all business. It does not exist to make a profit, but should be measured solely on its ability to serve and protect people. Though some see borough presidents as toothless tigers or glorified cheerleaders, this narrow view disregards the importance of having an advocate for the peoples’ well-being. Improving, not disbanding the office of the borough presidents is the only revision the Charter Commission should consider on behalf of the people of New York City and all of their many interests.
Austin Shafran has served on the staffs of some of the borough’s elected officials, including Congressmember Gary Ackerman, Assemblymember Mark Weprin and Councilmember David Weprin. Currently, Shafran is the Director of Political & Governmental Relations for Sheinkopf Ltd., he provides political consulting and strategic media relations for both private and public sector clients, including many elected officials.
