Musing: How Should I Rank the Mayoral Candidates?

Musing: How Should I Rank the Mayoral Candidates?

I was not surprised when the UFT decided not to endorse mayoral candidates, the Survey showed our membership divided over a range of candidates, we are a membership driven union.

Prior to last contract negotiations the union surveyed the members, many thousands replied, over 500 members served on negotiation committees meeting with Department counterparts and, to the extent possible, the contract reflects the opinions of the membership.

As a union representative I served the 2,000 plus members in my district, some members argued I should be more confrontational with the superintendent. I served all the members, and I couldn’t allow the angry ones to negatively impact my effectiveness.

When I gave the personnel director’s secretary her favorite coffee she smiled and asked, “What do you need me to do today?” Usually correct a salary or certification issue.

The personnel director was a calligraphy fan, at a flea market I found a set of old pen nibs and gave them to him, he was ecstatic. He began to resolve potential grievances with a phone call to a principal

I was serving the needs of the vast majority of the district just as the union strives to serve the interests of the vast majority its members

To endorse and rank candidates and alienate factions within the union is not productive.

The primary candidates attended the Spring Conference, remember Adams is running on an independent line in the November General Election. See the candidate presentations here.

The winner will be either Cuomo, currently leading in the polls, or Mandani or Adrienne Adams/Lander/Stringer, in other words: Is the combined sum of Adams/Lander/Stringer greater than the individual totals of Cuomo and Mandani separately. If so, one of them will win. Got that?

In each “round” the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their ballot transfers to their next choice. The first candidate reaching 50% is the winner.

Four years ago, the first rank choice voting election, the union endorsee, Scott Stringer, was a popular choice among members. A #metoo accusation sunk his candidacy. The NYTimes endorsed Sanitation Commissioner Garcia, who was the leading candidate going into the last” round,” Brooklyn Boro President Adams second and New School professor and MSNBC frequent commentator Maya Wylie third, when Wylie was eliminated the majority of votes transferred to Adams who skipped over Garcia and won.

In 2021 the NYTimes endorsed Garcia, who was the virtually unknown Sanitation Commissioner, she was leading going into the last round of the vote transfers, this year the Times announced it would not make an endorsement, not exactly accurate, in an editorial entitled, Advice to Voters in a Vexing Election, read here the Times muses,

New York needs a mayor who understands why the past decade has been disappointing. Crucial to that understanding is an acknowledgment that a certain version of progressive city management has failed, in New York and elsewhere.

and goes on to paint a highly critical view of the city,

Subway trips can have a chaotic or even menacing quality. Nearly half of bus riders board without paying their fares. The number of felony assaults has jumped more than 40 percent over the past decade. The city’s fourth graders, after significantly outperforming their peers in other large cities during the early 2000s, have fallen back in math and reading. Housing has become even less affordable, and homelessness has risen. In the most basic measure of the city’s appeal, the population remains well below its pre-Covid peak.Eleven candidates are competing for the Democratic nomination, and many New Yorkers are understandably disappointed by the field. It lacks any candidate who seems likely to be the city’s next great mayor. For that reason, we are not endorsing a candidate.

Unfortunately, Mr. Mamdani is running on an agenda uniquely unsuited to the city’s challenges.

Mr. Cuomo, we have serious objections to his ethics and conduct, even if he would be better for New York’s future than Mr. Mamdani.

Mr. Cuomo has the strongest policy record of the candidates.

Given those polls, however, the crucial choice may end up being where, if at all, voters decide to rank Mr. Cuomo or Mr. Mamdani. We do not believe that Mr. Mamdani deserves a spot on New Yorkers’ ballots. His experience is too thin, and his agenda reads like a turbocharged version of Mr. de Blasio’s dismaying mayoralty. As for Mr. Cuomo, we have serious objections to his ethics and conduct, even if he would be better for New York’s future than Mr. Mamdani.

and goes on to, sort of, make an endorsement,

An alternative to the two front-runners is Brad Lander, the city’s comptroller, or chief financial officer. Lander “brings a rare combination of integrity, inclusiveness and a deep understanding of how our city government should work.”

Adding Cuomo and/or Mamdani to your ballot moves them closer to the 50% in the vote transfer process, only ranking Adrienne Adams, Lander and Stringer does help accumulate vote transfers and possibly moving one of them into contention.

Hanging in the background is the “Big Beautiful Budget Bill” that will have disastrous consequences for New York City, instead of a range of new programs the city would have to reduce services or convince Trump to drive additional funding to his hometown, the online newsletter, City reports,

The “Big Beautiful Bill” passed by House Republicans and President Trump’s proposed budget for the next federal fiscal year together result in pretty ugly consequences for New York, according to new assessments on the impact of the proposed aid cuts. Start with the loss of $13.5 billion a year for the state’s Medicaid program. Then there is the $2.1 billion in lost federal funds that New York would need to spend annually to keep SNAP assistance, aka food stamps, at its current level. Federal housing aid statewide could be cut by $4.4 billion or about 50%.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office notes that the Big Beautiful Bill, which is its formal name, will lower incomes for the poorest 10% of Americans by 3.9% annually and raise after-tax incomes for the top 10% by 2.3%.

Which candidate is better equipped to run the city faced with horrendous reductions in federal funding? Yes, truly a truly vexing decision.