Let's Talk Politics.

Register To Vote Online

https://www.vote.nyc/page/register-vote

You may also obtain Registration Forms from libraries, post offices, and most New York City government agencies, or ask us to send you an application in the mail. Call 1-866-VOTE-NYC (1-866-868-3692) or email your mailing address to vote@boe.nyc.ny.us with the name of your borough in the subject line.

Election Calendar

OCTOBER 28 – LAST DAY TO REGISTER TO VOTE FOR GENERAL ELECTION.

Early Voting by Mail / Absentee Voting for General Election

  • October 26 – Last day for board of elections to receive application by mail or online portal for an absentee ballot for the General Election . 
  • November 4 – Last day to apply in person for absentee ballot for the General Election.
  • November 5 – Last day to postmark an absentee ballot for the General  Election.                                                                                                                          (Must be received at the Board of Elections no later than November 14th, Military Ballots by November 20th.)
  • November 5 – Last day to deliver in person an absentee ballot for the General Election to the County Board or Poll Site, by the close of polls.

General Election Dates

  • October 26 through November 3- Early voting days for General Election.  Hours Listed under Early Voting  Information.                                      (Location: Board of Elections, 378 S. Main St. Elmira, NY 14904) 
  • November 5 – General Election – 6 am to 9 pm.  (Location of poll site is determined by resident address.) 

 

 

Polling Sites In the Bronx

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.vote.nyc/sites/default/files/pdf/poll_site_list/PE2024/Poll_Site_List_ED_June_2024_Primary_Bronx_PRESS.pdf

Propositions

Proposal 1

This is an amendment to the New York State constitution.  

How It Appears on the Ballot

Amendment to Protect Against Unequal Treatment

This proposal would protect against unequal treatment based on ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, and sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity and pregnancy. It also protects against unequal treatment based on reproductive healthcare and autonomy.

A “YES” vote puts these protections in the New York State Constitution.

A “NO” vote leaves these protections out of the State Constitution.

What the Proposal 1 Would Achieve

The ballot measure would amend the Equal  Protection Clause of the New York Constitution to prohibit a person’s rights from being denied based on the person’s “ethnicity, national origin, age, [and] disability,” as well as the person’s “sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”[1]

As of 2024, the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the denial of rights to a person based on “race, color, creed, or religion.’

NOTE: The League of Women Voters of the City of New York and the League of Women Voters of New York State both strongly support a YES vote on Proposal 1.

Proposals 2-6

The five ballot proposals, 2-6, are to revise the New York City Charter based on recommendations by a City Charter Commission appointed by the Mayor.

The City Charter is like the City’s Constitution – it lays out the broad framework under which New York City’s government should function to provide continuity between each administration. The Charter specifies how changes can be made to the Charter and provides the framework for public input on legislation and Charter revisions. One method to change the Charter is by the Mayor appointing a City Charter Revision Commission to review, hold public hearings and make recommendations.

Changing the City Charter is not the only route that can be taken in order to make changes to how the City government functions.  For example, the City Council can pass new legislation within the framework of the Charter.  City Agencies can issue Memorandums of Understanding to alter how services are provided.

Below is a description of what each Proposal will achieve based on the 2024 Charter Revision  Commission’s Final Report, the language that will appear on the ballot, and a list of  Pros and Cons for each proposal developed by the League of Women Voters of the City of New York.   

There is an  important and overriding Con for all the proposals: The timing of this Charter Review process was extremely abbreviated.  It was just two months, June and July, with the Charter Review Commission approving the final report on July 25th.  It was  a very short timeline in which to address a broad range of issues.  During the public hearings, only 240 public testimonies were received, many of which had been by invitation.  Only 2,300 public statements were submitted, out of a city population of eight million.  The League of Women Voters of the City of New York has been on record against truncated Charter Review processes in the past, specifically under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg.  (Letter about  the 2002 Charter Revision process.)

Also, because of constraints to ballot proposals, each proposal is limited in length and does not reflect the complete details behind the individual proposals.  In most of the proposals, there are several topics combined into one proposal.  For voter clarity and understanding, they could have been addressed separately.   Additionally, the proposals, as they will appear on the November ballot, do not present the full impact of the individual proposals.

We have provided both PROS and CONS for each of the proposals which are listed below. Please be mindful of all aspects of each proposal, both pros and cons, before making your voting decision. 

Proposal 2 – Cleaning Public Property

 

How It Appears on the Ballot

Cleaning Public Property

This proposal would amend the City Charter to expand and clarify the Department of Sanitation’s power to clean streets and other City property and require disposal of waste in containers. 

Voting “Yes” will expand and clarify the Department of Sanitation’s power to clean streets and other City property and require disposal of waste in containers. 

Voting “No” leaves laws unchanged.

What the Proposal 2 Would Achieve

Source:  2024 Charter Revision Commission’s Final Report

Clean Streets: The CRC proposes an amendment to expand and clarify the New York City Department of Sanitation’s (DSNY) authority to keep the city clean. The amendment would:

  • Enable DSNY, at the mayor’s direction, to clean any city-owned property.
  •  Clarify that DSNY has the authority to require garbage to be containerized.
  • Extend DSNY enforcement authority over street vendors to other types of city property, instead of just streets and sidewalks.

PROS

The Department of Sanitation will have jurisdiction to clean city parks, sidewalks and medians that are not currently stated under its authority.
The Department of Sanitation will provide enforcement of street vendors in addition to Parks Enforcement Police and NYPD.
The Department of Sanitation can mandate garbage containers.
CONS

The ballot question does not mention that the full revision expands the authority of the Department of Sanitation to enforce vendors in city parks. This change of jurisdiction and interdepartmental co-management does not need to be in the Charter and could be addressed with a Memorandum of Understanding between City Agencies, as has sufficed in the past.
A separate agreement will be needed to ensure that local union DC37 employees are not displaced or their work is not impeded.
Having three different agencies (NYPD, Parks Enforcement and Sanitation) authorized for street vendor enforcement may lead to conflicts in responsibility and over enforcement.
The full impact of this amendment is not stated in the ballot question.

Proposal 3 – Fiscal Responsibility

 

How it Appears on the Ballot

Additional Estimates of the Cost of Proposed Laws and Updates to Budget Deadlines

This proposal would amend the City Charter to require fiscal analysis from the Council before hearings and votes on laws, authorize fiscal analysis from the Mayor, and update budget deadlines.

Voting “Yes” would amend the City Charter to require additional fiscal analysis prior to hearings and votes on local laws, and update budget deadlines.

Voting “No” leaves laws unchanged.

What the Proposal 3 Would Achieve

Source:  2024 Charter Revision Commission’s Final Report

The CRC proposes an amendment intended to improve how the city assesses the fiscal impact of proposed local laws and address certain outdated and inefficient budget deadlines. The amendment would:  

  • Require that an initial fiscal impact statement be prepared prior to a public hearing on a proposed local law.  
  • Require an updated fiscal impact statement prior to a vote on a proposed local law by the full City Council.  
  • Require that fiscal impact statements for proposed laws contain an estimate by the City Council and require that the Council provide an opportunity for the Mayor’s Office of Management and Budget to submit fiscal impact statements at the same time.  
  • Update several budget-related deadlines, including moving the preliminary budget deadline from January 16 to February 1 in years following a mayoral election and extending the deadline for submission of the executive budget from April 26 to May 1 in order to ensure the executive budget reflects valuable information about tax collections and revenues obtained at the April 1 tax deadline.  

PROS

  • This proposal would provide an estimate of the cost of legislation from two different agencies.
  • The proposal allows more time for new mayors to prepare a budget immediately after an election.

CONS

  • A request for a fiscal impact statement currently exists in the Charter
  • A requirement for a fiscal statement from the Office of Management and Budget may delay a vote on urgent legislation.
  • As written, this proposal combines two separate topics – both the fiscal analysis and new budget deadlines – that should be considered separately.

Proposal 4 – Public Safety

 

How it Appears on the Ballot

More Notice and Time Before Votes on Public Safety Legislation

This proposal would require additional public notice and time before the City Council votes on laws respecting the public safety operations of the Police, Correction, or Fire Departments.  

Voting “Yes” will require additional notice and time before the Council votes  on laws respecting public safety operations of the Police, Correction, or Fire  Departments.

Voting “No” leaves laws unchanged. 

What the Proposal 4 Would Achieve

Source:  2024 Charter Revision Commission’s Final Report

The CRC proposes an amendment intended to promote public input and deliberation before the City Council votes on local laws affecting public safety operations of certain agencies. The amendment would:  

  • Establish additional procedural requirements when the City Council considers proposed local laws affecting the public safety operations of three city agencies: the New York City Police Department, the New York City Department of Correction, and the Fire Department of the City of New York.  
  • Specifically, it would require that when the full Council intends to vote on a covered public safety proposal, the Council must give an additional notice to the public, the mayor, and the commissioners of affected agencies at least 30 days in advance of such a vote. During the period between the notice and the ultimate vote, the mayor and affected agencies could hold one or more additional public hearings on the proposal in order to solicit additional public input, though they would not be required to hold such hearings. These hearings could include, where appropriate, public hearings in all boroughs to facilitate input from impacted communities. 

PROS

  • This proposal seeks to address the lack of attendance at public hearings by increasing the number of non-legislative agencies that can hold public hearings. 
  • It identifies and classifies legislative topics that affect public safety to expand the process to allow for more public input.

CONS

  • While this revision provides for possibly more public hearings, it does not improve the process for greater public participation. City Council is already required to hold public hearings.
  • It erodes the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government by empowering non-legislative agencies to hold hearings on public safety legislation.
  • The Mayor is already empowered to hold hearings, as well as to provide input at Council hearings.
  • Adding more time for review and public hearings may impede emergency public safety law changes.

Proposal 5 – Capital Planning

 

How it Appears on the Ballot

Capital Planning 

This proposal would amend the City Charter to require more detail in the  annual assessment of City facilities, mandate that facility needs inform capital  planning, and update capital planning deadlines.  

Voting “Yes” would require more detail when assessing maintenance needs of  City facilities, mandate that facility needs inform capital planning, and update capital  planning deadlines.

 Voting “No” leaves laws unchanged.

What the Proposal 5 Would Achieve

Source:  2024 Charter Revision Commission’s Final Report

The CRC proposes an amendment intended to improve the city’s capital planning process by promoting transparency and ensuring the city collects critical information to inform capital planning, and update capital planning deadlines. The amendment would:  

  • Promote transparency by ensuring the city publishes more detailed information about the state of repair for facilities.  
  • Ensure that the New York City Department of City Planning and the Mayor’s Office of Management and Budget consider city facility conditions and maintenance needs, together with other factors such as geographic distribution, impact on resiliency, and the criticality of an asset to an agency’s function or mission when developing the 10-Year Capital Strategy.  
  • Amend the date that the 10-Year Capital Strategy is due from November 1st to align with the date for the city’s preliminary budget, and similarly change the date for the public hearing associated with the 10-Year Capital Strategy to accommodate the later date for the initial submission.

PROS

  • The proposal could provide more information on projects for city planning. 

CONS

  • This proposal does not need to be incorporated into the Charter.  The issue it is trying to address can be resolved through administrative measures.

Proposal 6 – Minority- and Women-Owned Business and Modernization of City Operations

 

How it Appears on the Ballot

Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprises (MWBEs), Film Permits, and Archive Review Boards 

This proposal would amend the City Charter to establish the Chief Business  Diversity Officer (CBDO), authorize the Mayor to designate the office that issues  film permits, and combine archive boards. 

Voting “Yes” would establish the CBDO to support MWBEs, authorize the  Mayor to designate the office that issues film permits, and combine two boards. 

Voting “No” leaves laws unchanged.

What the Proposal 6 Would Achieve

Source:  2024 Charter Revision Commission’s Final Report

The CRC proposes an amendment to update several charter provisions intended to improve city government operations. The amendment would:  

  • Enshrine the chief business diversity officer in the charter and provide that this position will serve as the point of contact for M/WBEs, evaluate the efficacy of city policies to address disparities in procurement, and propose needed changes to city policy.  
  • Empower the mayor to give the office that processes film permits — the Mayor’s Office of Media and Entertainment — the power to issue those permits.  
  • Combine two charter-created boards that share the same mission of reviewing municipal archives.  

PROS

  • By making the position of Chief Business Diversity Officer a required position in the City Charter, it demonstrates support for the importance of Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprises.
  • It would combine two different archive boards that exist under the current Charter.

CONS

  • This proposal does not need to be in the Charter as this position already exists in the current
  • By codifying the position, it would impede future mayors from making decisions on roles in city government that meet their administrations’ needs.
  • This proposal addresses three different topics, each of which should be considered separately.

What is New York’s State Proposal 1?

Here is the language of Proposal 1, which would represent a change to section 11 of article 1 of the state’s constitution, according to the state Board of Elections (BOE) website:

  1. a. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof. No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed [or], religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy, be subjected to any discrimination in [his or her] their civil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.
    b. Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.

So how is that different from what is currently stated?

In effect, the constitution protects against “unequal treatment based on race, color, creed, and religion,” the BOE website states. Under the new proposal, the BOE says the constitution would also protect against unequal treatment based on “ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, and pregnancy outcomes, as well as reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”

Restoration of Voting Rights for Felons

It has been common practice in the United States to make felons ineligible to vote, in some cases permanently. Over the last few decades, the general trend has been toward reinstating the right to vote at some point, although this is a state-by-state policy choice. (See “Recent State Actions” below for a chronology.) 

Currently, state approaches to felon disenfranchisement vary tremendously. NCSL has divided states into four categories, as detailed in Table 1 below.  

In all cases, “automatic restoration” does not mean voter registration is automatic. Typically, prison officials automatically inform election officials that an individual’s rights have been restored. The person is then responsible for re-registering through normal processes. Some states, such as California, require voter registration information be provided to formerly incarcerated people.  

In summary: 

  • In the District of Columbia, Maine and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they are incarcerated.  
  • In 23 states, felons lose their voting rights only while incarcerated, and receive automatic restoration upon release. Note that in Maryland, convictions for buying or selling votes can only be restored through pardon. 
  • In 15 states, felons lose their voting rights during incarceration, and for a period of time after, typically while on parole and/or probation. Voting rights are automatically restored after this time period. Former felons may also have to pay any outstanding fines, fees or restitution before their rights are restored.  
  • In 10 states, felons lose their voting rights indefinitely for some crimes, or require a governor’s pardon for voting rights to be restored, face an additional waiting period after completion of sentence (including parole and probation) or require additional action before voting rights can be restored. These states are listed in the fourth category on Table 1. Details on these states are found in Table 2 below. (click on the link https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights )
FYI New York – Lost Only While Incarcerated | Automatic Restoration After Release

Governor Hochul comes to the Bronx for the Bronx Democratic Party Bronx Women For Kamala Harris

By Robert Press

In front of elected officials and party leaders from all over the borough, Bronx Democratic County Leader State Senator Jamaal Bailey declared it is time for us to get Kamala Harris elected as the next President of the United States. Mentioning only fifty-five days left until election day he spoke up Vice-President Harris, as he said Vice-President Harris “busted her ass to get where she is” as he then introduced the special guest New York State Governor Kathy Hochul.

Governor Hochul said that it is important for Vice-President Kamala Harris to win the presidency, but also it is just as important to win back the House of Representatives and put Congressman Hakeem Jeffries as the Speaker of the House. Governor Hochul mentioned that the rest of the country goes as New York goes.

Other speakers were soon to be new Congressman George Latimer, State Senator Luis Sepulveda, State Senator Nathalia Fernandez, Assemblywoman Yudelka Tapia, Assemblywoman Karines Reyes, and the newest member of the State Assembly Landon Dias. Assemblywoman Chantel Jackson was also on hand but did not speak, and Bronx Borough President Vanessa Gibson arrived after the event was over.

In what has been dubbed the costliest congressional race ever, George Latimer emerged victorious over the incumbent, Jamaal Bowman, in a decisive landslide victory. It is reported that Mr. Latimer’s campaign team was taken aback by the swift announcement of his win shortly after the polls closed. More election results will be posted on Wednesday.

In the 14th congressional district Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wins the Democratic primary

AG James and Mayor Adams Cancel Press Conference at Jacobi Hospital to Announce Opioid Money for the Bronx

By Robert Press

As she has been doing statewide New York State Attorney General Letitia James has been going to each of the sixty-two counties in the state dropping off checks from the Billion Dollar Opioid settlement with Big Pharma. A press conference was called for Friday morning at Jacobi Hospital where AG James was to present the hospital with a check for fifty million dollars as the Bronx Share of the Opioid settlement. 

Since Mayor Adams was coming to Jacobi Hospital, Councilwoman Kristy Marmorato called for a protest against the proposed Just Home project at the hospital to house fifty current incarcerated people from the Rikers Island Infirmary at Building #2 on the Jacobi Campus free to go wherever they want with just a security guard at the front desk in the middle of a thriving residential area. The reason for the protest Councilwoman Marmorato said was that the Health and Hospitals Corporation has lied to people of her District by saying that incarcerated people with only Stage Four Cancer would be placed at the Jacobi building. She continued that the criteria has changed since the HHC first told the community, and that HHC has now said other people could wind up at Jacobi. Apparently wanting to avoid the protest the AG and Mayor canceled the press conference. 

Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York Statement Congratulating Governor Kathy Hochul on Her Historic Victory

The Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York (“WBASNY”) congratulates Governor Kathy Hochul on her election to a full four-year term and for making history in being the first woman elected to become New York’s Governor.

In her first year in office, Governor Hochul has been a leader on issues important to WBASNY’s membership including aiding access to abortion and reproductive healthcare. WBASNY looks forward to working with Governor Hochul and the State legislature in this upcoming session to secure second passage of the Equal Rights Amendment and increasing the assigned counsel rate.  

https://voterlookup.elections.ny.gov/

Do Our COVID-19 Vaccines Work Against the Omicron Variant or Not. What is Going on Governor Kathy Hochul?

By Robert Press

There has been much hype as to whether to get vaccinated or not to get vaccinated. Conflicting words have been put about be it by Health officials, elected officials, mandates, word of mouth, or Anti Vaxers. Health officials have said the only way to prevent, or have a safe period of having the COVID-19 virus (or it’s variants) is to get vaccinated with one of the three vaccines that were available. Elected officials have mandated vaccinations in order to continue working or continuing a regular lifestyle. 

The public was recently told the vaccinations require a booster shot, and while only suggested as of now, it is only a matter of time as to when Booster shots will also be mandated. New York City has gone as far as giving incentives to get vaccinated, or boosted by the end of this year. Mayor Bill de Blasio has said he expects the Omicron variant to be with us for only a few weeks before it passes, which must mean once a person has the virus they must become immune to it. That is similar to what I was told by Doctor Dave Chokshi Commissioner of the NYCDOH, and Doctor Mitchell Katz head of the NYCHHS, with Doctor Katz going as far as saying I did not need to get vaccinated after I explained that I had the COVID-19 virus in March of 2020 for only five days. I did get vaccinated in September of 2021, and had a bad reaction to the second shot, but that is another story.

Now that the Omicron variant has hit New York, on December 18th the governor’s office reported 192 cases statewide, and 41 in New York City. There has been no more reporting of Omicron cases, just that all positive test results are all that of the Omicron variant. This is similar to what Governor Andrew Cuomo did in 2020 by counting any and all deaths as a result of the COVID-19 virus. Governor Hochul has declared a Disaster Emergency in the state of New York with Executive Order 11.1 However in that Executive order Governor Hochul states the following 

WHEREAS, this Omicron variant has been shown to be highly transmissible and may cause exponential spread;

WHEREAS, current vaccinations do not appear to be as effective against Omicron infection, while remaining stronger against severe disease;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Kathy Hochul, Governor of the State of New York, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution of the State of New York and Section 28 of Article 2-B of the Executive Law, do hereby continue the terms, conditions, and suspensions contained in Executive Order 11 until January 25, 2022.

Does this mean that the Omicron variant will be gone on January 26, 2022 Governor Hochul, or will there be another extension? What is going on Governor Kathy Hochul?

BYLINE: By Demi Taveras
Photo Credit: Courtesy of MovieStillsDB
Photo Caption: Cillian Murphy stars in the 2005 comedy-drama film “Breakfast on Pluto.”
—
“Dune: Part Two” (PG-13) — The sequel to the 2021 sci-fi film “Dune” is officially out now to rent after garnering more than $685 million worldwide in its box-office release. Starring our modern-day movie stars Timothee Chalamet (“Wonka”) and Zendaya (“Euphoria”), “Part Two” picks up right after the events of the first film that left Paul Atreides (Chalamet) and his mother, Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), in the hands of the Fremen troops on the planet Arrakis. Paul and Lady Jessica begin learning the ways of the Fremen, while Baron Vladimir Harkonnen remains relentless in his plans to take over the desert planet. The Baron recruits his bloodthirsty nephew, Feyd-Rautha (Austin Butler), to assist him in conquering Arrakis. With much more action, an excellent ensemble cast, and visuals that will give you goosebumps, this incredible film will make you want to stay in the worlds of “Dune” forever. (Apple TV+)
In Case You Missed It
“Quiet on Set: The Dark Side of Kids TV” (TV-14) — This five-part docu-series isn’t an easy watch, whether you grew up watching Nickelodeon’s shows or not, but it’s monumental for shedding light on the brutal behind-the-scenes world child actors deal with. Featuring interviews from child actors who worked for shows like “All That,” “Zoey 101,” “The Amanda Show” and more, the first four episodes detail the horrific work environment they had to endure at the mercy of producers like Brian Peck and Dan Schneider. Drake Bell (“Drake & Josh”) explains the crimes that were committed to him by Peck, a sex offender who continued to work in Hollywood following his conviction. The series also highlights the subtly inappropriate jokes that Schneider would slide in for unknowing young actors like Ariana Grande and Jamie Lynn Spears. The fifth and final episode includes extra, in-depth interviews led by journalist Soledad O’Brien. (Max)
“Breakfast on Pluto” (R) — Before Cillian Murphy ever donned a brimmed hat to play J. Robert Oppenheimer and win an Oscar, he once played Patricia “Kitten” Braden in this peculiar comedy-drama film from 2005. Born Patrick, Patricia lives in the fictional Irish town of Tyrellin during the 1970s and causes havoc because of her choice to come out as transgender. After years of getting in trouble at school and never feeling like she belonged, Patricia decides to run away from Tyrellin and see where the world takes her. As she tries to find her footing in the dodgiest of places, she meets an unusual array of individuals, like Billy Hatchet and the Mohawks, magician Bertie Vaughan, and the singing/dancing Wombles, who all eventually push her closer to realizing and accepting her truth. This film will leave you astounded with Murphy’s range as an actor. Out now. (Amazon Prime Video)

By Robert Press

Tuesday night was the Allerton International Merchants Meeting, which was held in an outdoor area on Radcliff Avenue. The guest speaker was Bronx Department of Transportation Commissioner Nivardo Lopez. Commissioner Lopez was there to speak on two topics. The first was the Escooter Pilot Program, and the second was about new regulations for the Outdoor Dining on the sidewalk and in the street. 

Commissioner Lopez went over the rules for the Ecooter program, and fielded questions from the audience, much the same as from other community meetings he attended. He handed out a card with all three Escooter contacts. Bird 866-205-2442, hello@bird.co. Lime 888-546-3345, support@li.me. VEO 855-836-2256, hello@veoride.com. He suggested if there were any problems to get in touch with the companies. One of the officers in attendance from the 49th Precinct suggested a large tag with the individual Escooter number on it in a visible area so the Escooter could be identified if the rider was riding improperly. 

On the subject of Outdoor Dining Commissioner Lopez said that new rules were being gone through by a task force for next year. Some of the rules would be that any outside dining could only be in front of the establishment, and no further as some have done legally with the owners permission. He added that there would be no permanent street structures, because it would only be allowed from May to October. That brought a cheer from some in the audience. 

The NCO officer spoke on some of the quality of life issues that were brought up, saying that the 49th Precinct was doing the best job they could at going after the illegal dirt bikes and loud music being heard at all hours of the night.