Choosing a minority leader is a perennial problem for the Common Council, because the Council is typically made up almost exclusively of Democrats. In the past, when there was a lone Republican on the Council--Dick Goetz for much of the first decade of this century, and Bart Delaney for much of the second--that person has been the minority leader. On a few occasions in the past, things have gotten more creative. In 2012, when the only non-Democrat on the Council was an NOP (no official party), David Marston, it was maintained that to be the minority leader one had to be a member of a party. So the Council, apparently drawing on a different meaning of minority, chose Ohrine Stewart, an African-American woman and a Democrat, as the minority leader. The same thing happened in 2016, when the Council passed over the only non-Democrat--Priscilla Moore, again an NOP--to elect Abdus Miah, a Bangladeshi American, as the minority leader. In 2018, the Council got over the notion that the minority leader had to be a member of a party. In that year, Dominic Merante, an NOP and the only non-Democrat on the Council, ceded the position to Eileen Halloran, a Democrat; in 2019, he claimed it for himself. This year's solution to the problem seems to be the most inventive yet.
When the recommendation of Wolff came before the Council for a vote, Merante cried foul. He protested that he had not been invited to the Democratic caucus where these things has been decided, although Wolff had been present. He alleged that the process by which she had been chosen was invalid, saying it was not transparent and not inclusive.
Jeff Baker, the new counsel to the Council, said there were no rules in the city charter that govern caucuses and parties. Council president Tom DePietro said that "the new attorney advised us that how we did it in the past was not correct." It wasn't clear if the "new attorney" was Baker or Cheryl Roberts nor was it clear exactly what had been incorrect. DePietro then suggested that there be a short recess during which the four members of the "minority party"--Merante, Wolff, Lewis, and Mizan--could caucus in the hall and come to a decision about who would be the minority leader. Halloran, who had stated earlier that she did not caucus with the Democrats, although she is a registered Democrat, joined the caucus in the hall, as did Jane Trombley. There were then six aldermen in the hall, caucusing as the minority, and four aldermen left in the Council Chamber.
After ten minutes or so, Baker went out to speak with the "minority caucus" and reported back to DePietro. A few minutes later, DePietro went into the hall to call the members back. Although Halloran was heard to say, "We're almost done," the six returned to the chamber at DePietro's bidding. The issue of who will be the minority leader remains unresolved.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CAROLE OSTERINK
1.
ReplyDeleteWhere is it written that a minority leader is required? It's nowhere in the City Charter or Code nor, it seems, is it a requirement of the state's General Municipal or General City laws (though I'm still searching).
Instead, it's probably a remnant of local practice from a time when the nation's two principal parties were equally viable in city politics.
But if no Republican now sits with the Council that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of Republicans in the city, even if the affiliation means little more than the privilege to vote in a Primary.
In the circumstances, wouldn't it be healthier for members of the city's de facto minority party - the GOP - if the Council dropped the charade and refused to designate a minority leader from its unsympathetic bench.
The role of Majority Leader, which does appear in the Charter, should be preserved.
2.
ReplyDeleteTo those who'll say that a minority party simply means the second largest party, the following example should send the historically-minded on a search for the original context and meaning of "minority [party]" in Hudson politics.
If any level of Republican organization existed at the City level, then we'd have heard rumblings about the HCDC's (Democrat Committee's) sponsorship of the upcoming Ward meetings where residents can meet their new aldermen, our new mayor, and the council president. The fact that these meetings will require reservations is due entirely to the HCDC's gratuitous and self-promoting sponsorship.
My point is that a "minority leader" who's not really a member of the principal de facto minority (a considerable demographic in Hudson who are represented by residents alone) wouldn't even begin to smell a problem in the above circumstances. Because the political outlook of the entire Common Council is essentially Democrat, and to my eyes aligned in monolithic fashion, how does it help the city's Republican residents for the majority party to assign a leader from among its own number? I'd argue that it's not only detrimental but is even a tad dishonest.
Yesterday I had it on good authority that the HCDC had the "best intentions" in its sponsorship of the upcoming, space-limited Ward meetings. To those who recognize the same phrase used for the paving of the infernal road, perhaps only you will truly grasp the meaninglessness and danger of borrowing from the majority to represent the city's poorly represented minority outlook.
Among those vying to become "Minority Leader," if they had simply and uncritically accepted that the HCDC's sponsorship of the Ward meetings was unproblematic and justified by "best intentions," then it would be far better for the city's de facto minority to be rid of the fake position altogether.
Again, where is it written that a Minority Leader is required? To the actual members of the City's predominant political minority, their interests may actually be threatened by the fig leaf position, an absurd remnant of a long lost context. (For anyone interested, I can offer additional hazardous examples.)
If there's no "minority leader" specified in the City Charter, then aren't the Aldermen competing for power that's fabricated out of thin air? If true, that's pretty screwed up, not to mention offensive to the city's actual political minority.
ReplyDeleteThe City of Buffalo's Charter establishes both roles - "The council shall designate a majority leader and a minority leader" - but apparently its Common Council doesn't assign minority leadership if nobody's in the minority.
This is reflected in the NY State General Municipal Law for urban renewal agencies, "In the event there be no minority leader of the common council of the city of Buffalo …"
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/GMU/639