NYC NOW - Midday News: NJ Lawmakers Debate Affordable Housing Funding, Yellow Cabs See Best January Since Pandemic, NY State and Corrections Union Reach Tentative Deal, and Assault Survivors Face Claims Deadline

Episode Date: February 28, 2025

New Jersey lawmakers are debating whether to direct more tax dollars toward building affordable housing or providing financial assistance to help residents buy homes. Meanwhile, new data from the NYC Taxi and Limousine Commission show yellow cabs had their strongest January since the pandemic. Also, a tentative deal between the Hochul administration and the corrections officers’ union could bring an end to a prolonged strike. Plus, a two-year legal window allowing survivors to file claims for past assaults under the Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act closes Friday.

Welcome to NYC now, your source for local news in and around New York City from WMYC. It's Friday, February 28th. Here's the midday news from Michael Hill. A debate is brewing in New Jersey over whether to use more tax dollars to build affordable housing or to use that money to help residents buy those houses. WNYC's Mike Hayes has more. In his last budget proposal, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy, is floating the idea of taking $40 million from the state's affordable housing trust fund

and using that money on a down payment assistance program for would-be homebuyers. But the trust fund that Murphy wants to tap into is supposed to be used for building low-priced homes. Housing advocates and home builders say the state will struggle to meet its goal of constructing 84,000 new affordable homes in the next decade if that money is diverted. And they're asking Murphy to find another way to fund the down payment assistance program before the budget is finalized at the end of June. New data from New York City's Taxing Limousine Commission shows that yellow cabs had their best January since the pandemic.

The WNIC's Ramsey-C-Colife reports. The data shows a 19% increase in cab trips within the Manhattan congestion zone in January compared to the same period last year. The trend corresponds with the start of congestion pricing. Cab riders pay a lower surcharge for rides in the toll zone than competing Ubers or lifts. Here's Cabi Tersem Singh. You also pay a calculation 15 to 18 prayers, but now you can pay a calculation 21. I'm happy with that.

The Trump administration wants congestion pricing turned off later this month. Governor Kathy Hokel says the tolls are earning revenue for the MTA and reducing traffic as intended. She says congestion pricing will continue until a judge orders otherwise. 48 with sunshine now, mostly sunny on this last day of the month. 51 and gusty for a high. then tomorrow. Watch first, mostly sunny, mid-50s gusty turning cold at night. Stay close. There's more after the break. The majority of New York State's corrections officers remain on strike, but perhaps not for much longer.

Governor Kathy Hochle's administration struck a tentative deal with the officer's union late last night. The deal calls for officers to return to the job tomorrow, since the union did not authorize the strike, is up to the individual officers to decide whether they're coming back. Joining us now from Albany is WNIC reporter John Campbell. John, what do we know about this deal? Well, Michael, it's a seven-page agreement that was put together with the help of a mediator, and it mostly tackles two big issues. One is solitary confinement.

The other is staffing. The HALT Act is a state law that restricts the use of solitary confinement, and it's one of the major reasons why the officers are striking. they want it repealed. And this deal calls for extending a temporary suspension of portions of that law for at least 90 days, basically making it easier to put a person in solitary confinement. That's something that prison reform advocates hate. They say that law is meant to uphold basic human rights. On the staffing side, this deal would put restrictions on mandatory 24-hour overtime shifts, which was a focus of a lot of the officers.

They've been forced to work more because staffing levels are so low in the state's 42 prisons right now. And it also implements new rules when staffing vacancies are greater than 30%. The strike has gone on John now for 12 days. Will the striking workers face any sort of discipline? That really depends in part on whether they return back to work. If they do, they won't face any discipline, aside from the missed pay and the fines they accrued while they were striking. But that's a big if.

There's more than 13,000 corrections officers across the state. At the height of the strike, the state said more than nine out of ten of them walked off the job. And remember, Michael, this strike, as you said, was not sanctioned by the union. So really, it's up to each and every officer to decide whether they accept the deal. If they don't, they could face termination or the state has even really set the stage for potential contempt of court arrest since the state maintains this strike is illegal under the Taylor law. That's a law that prohibits public employees from striking. So will they have to sign this in some way or the union will have to? I'm just baffled about how

this will work. When will we know if the corrections officers will accept this? We'll get a sense of that tomorrow. It sets a deadline for them to return to the job with different times depending on their shifts. If they return by then, they won't face any discipline aside from the fines. That's the incentive to get them back on the job quickly. So if they return, no extra discipline. If they don't, they could face extra discipline. There's a caveat for people who participated in any sort of criminal or illegal activity during the strike, like vandalism, they can still face discipline. And it really remains to be seen whether these officers will go along with that. We should note, the National Guard will be.

remain in the prisons for the time being. WNYC is John Campbell giving us an update on the unauthorized, unsanctioned strike there by some of the state corrections officers. Thank you, John. My pleasure. A two-year window that extended the ability of people to report past assaults is closing today. Usually claims of assault are subject to a statute of limitations, a time limit that cuts off when someone can bring a claim against an alleged abuser. But the Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, sponsored by Councilmember Carlina Rivera of Manhattan,

opened a two-year look-back window. That means for the last two years, survivors could report claims even if they took place before the cutoff date defined by the statute of limitations. Councilmember Carlina Rivera joins us now. Councilmember, thank you for joining us. Since the window opened, some 540 New Yorkers have sued the city, alleging they were sexually abused by staff at city juvenile detention centers, while they were held there as children. Were you surprised by the volume of claims?

Absolutely. Over my time in the council, I have heard many, many stories of people who have suffered abuse in our justice systems, but to see this many claims and to hear the stories of these horrible acts that people have encountered under the care of New York City, especially at a formidable time in their lives as vulnerable people,

It's been very, very tragic, but this is what the bill was intended to do to ensure that anyone who suffers gender-motivated violence can finally have their day in court to seek financial compensation, even if they did not feel safe speaking out when violence took place years or decades ago. After the window closes at the end of today, a nine-year statute of limitations will go into effect. Will there be a further effort to extend that period again? We are looking at what we can do beyond this law. The statute of limitations for filing civil actions under the Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act is typically seven years. With this legislation, it is now nine years. However, after today, you know, that nine-year limitation statute will be in place. So we're looking to see what we can do after really what we've seen from the claims that have been filed.

And hopefully we just want to ensure that there will be a. pathway to justice for people, as we know. There is no timeline to process trauma. And it is very, very typical and obviously not uncommon for it to take a long time for people to come forward with these claims. The lawsuits have targeted the city administration for children's services and the Department of Correction. What's been the response of the city or of the Adams administration to these lawsuits? Well, unfortunately, what we've seen from the city is really a step forward to dismiss the cases. We have focused on juvenile justice facilities because the prevalence of sexual abuse within the jail and juvenile system. And we are hoping that the city also

implements further protections to end the sexual abuse and the predatory nature inside of the justice system. But we really haven't seen them cooperate. Unfortunately, under the guise of interpretation, the city is moving to dismiss these claims and avoid accountability. And the law clear, we'll do whatever we have to do to ensure clarification to allow survivors to pursue their claim. And if that means pursuing a further amendment or another piece of legislation, I'm working alongside survivors and experts and also people who are defending these individuals to do so. How does someone file a claim today if they think they qualify? Well, there are a number of firms, a number of attorneys that we've spoken to that have done

a good amount of media and press to ensure that people feel that not only do they have adequate representation, but there are also advocates within the firms themselves. So you could contact your local official and find out how to file that claim. And we would be happy to assist you through navigating that process. Unlike the New York State Adult Survivors Act that preceded this, not all sexual assault survivors were eligible under the Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act, people had to be able to prove that someone used violence against them because of their gender. Why include that? Well, we thought that was important because the ASA was an incredibly important piece of legislation. It applied to sexual offenses only for individuals 18 years

or older at the time of the allegation. So there really is no other piece of legislation like the one we've put forward with the Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act. And what we saw were many different kinds of stories that we wanted to ensure that we were covering a wide range of survivors. I've heard from individuals in our queer community were being attacked because of their identity, women sexually assaulted by high profile individuals, mothers trapped in cycles of domestic violence, and most recently, the stories of those abuse while under the care of the city at juvenile justice facilities. So we certainly wanted to be inclusive. How does someone, I'm curious, how does someone prove that someone attack them and sexually or violently, if, because of their gender?

Well, what we have seen is that there are a number of stories that have come out where there are repeat offenders, especially within the facilities themselves. But if you were to look at the actual definition itself, gender-motivated violence is really an act of physical violence, motivated by a victim's gender, including sexual assault, assaults targeting individuals based on their gender or sexual orientation, and other crimes are included under that definition. So we have had a number of individuals come forward with stories, whether against high-profile celebrities or, unfortunately, against actual city agencies over decades. And so that definition is broad, but it is very clear in the law.

And so we've, as you've mentioned, hundreds of claims already. Councilman, we have about 15 seconds left. I'm curious, what motivated you to become involved in this issue in the first place? My journey with this legislation started when a group of women came to the council with claims against their doctor. 200 women would come forward with allegations of abuse against disgraced OBGYN, Robert Haddon. And he would be sentenced to 20 years in. federal prison for sexual assault in July of 2023. So these are

survivors that bravely came forward then and now to denounce youth detention centers, for example. And that was really what motivated me. I've done a lot of work on this issues in my time when they counsel, expanding resources for domestic violence

survivors, but also championing a package of legislation of 11 bills to stop sexual harassment when I was chair of the Women's Caucus. So it's been something that I've really been working on, and I'm hoping to continue to do so alongside the brave survivors who have really taken this on. We've been speaking this morning with Councilmember Carlina Rivera. She sponsors the Gender Motivative Violence Protection Act. Councilmember, thank you. Come back and

see us again, please. Thank you. Thanks for listening. This is NYC now from WMYC. Be sure to catch us every weekday, three times a day, for your top news headlines and occasional deep dives. and subscribe wherever you get your podcast. See you this evening.