BILL BLASTS OVERCROWDING City Councilman Bill deBlasio accepted an invitation to attend a press conference at which his colleague Vinny Gentile assailed overcrowding in Brooklyn high schools. That's commendable, but is it consistent with deBlasio's support for the elimination of John Jay High School? Where, we wonder, did deBlasio think John Jay's thousands of students were going to go? Closing the school certainly worsened overcrowding at Brooklyn's other high schools, including Fort Hamilton High School, Gentile's former school and the focus of his complaints.

While "students are packed in there like sardines" (as Gentile put it) at Fort Hamilton and elsewhere, the giant Park Slope building that housed John Jay is well under capacity. A Gentile press release said, "Councilman Gentile blasted the Department of Education for failing to take a closer look at the results of eliminating freshman enrollment at several schools that are being revamped in the next few years." Pssst, Vinny… One of those schools was John Jay, at the encouragement of Bill deBlasio.

As you might guess, deBlasio has no problem reconciling his positions on overcrowding and eliminating John Jay. "We need more seats at schools that offer students the potential to succeed," he said in a statement.

"Parents, teachers and community leaders all agreed John Jay desperately needed a shake-up and its transformation to a community-based school is something we need to do more of, not less." John Jay High School was indeed failing. But many of the high schoolers who would have attended it this year are instead at schools that may be just as bad, if not worse-and now are more overcrowded to boot. The best solution might have been to fix John Jay. But many had come to view that as impossible, in part because of teachers' union rules that prevented the city from getting rid of John Jay's burned-out staff. Which reminds us of another official scheduled to attend Gentile's press conference: Park Slope resident Randi Weingarten, president of the United Federation of Teachers.

NORMAN'S RULES OF DATING Assemblyman Clarence Norman was apparently portraying himself as chivalrous when he paid for his dates' meals at visits to swanky restaurants like Gage & Tollner and the Knickerbocker. Unfortunately the Democratic Party, not Norman, was really picking up the tabs. According to New York Sun columnist Jack Newfield, chivalry gave way to chicanery and perhaps criminality when Norman whipped out his Kings County Democratic Party credit card to pay for meals with dates at the steakhouse.

Newfield wrote that Hynes's people are methodically checking out Norman's credit card expenditures, even interviewing the owner of Knickerbocker to ask whom Norman was eating with. "They appeared to be dates," the owner told the New York Post, which followed Newfield's column a day later. Norman spent $4,480 at Brooklyn's Gage & Tollner and $1,323 at the Knickerbocker on his party Amex card from July 1997 through December 2002, the Post reported.

Out of $140,000 in charges, Newfield wrote, "About $100,000 appears to be credit card abuse to pay for an extravagant lifestyle of stylish jewelry, clothes, and exquisite dining. Mr. Norman would have made an excellent restaurant critic, based on his credit card receipts." JUDGE'S REP TAKES BEATING: Housing Court Judge Dawn Jimenez may have lost more than an election Tuesday when she was overwhelmed by ShawnDya Simpson in the Brooklyn-wide Democratic primary for a Civil Court judgeship. She may have lost her good reputation as well.

In the waning days of the campaign, Jimenez leveled accusations against Simpson in a mailing that some called unjustified and inaccurate.

Then, on primary day, Jimenez supporters handed out fliers that suggested she was supported by Assemblyman Jim Brennan, Councilmen David Yassky and Bill deBlasio, and Democratic district leader Jake Gold. Brennan had in fact endorsed Simpson, and Yassky and deBlasio had remained neutral. Gold had gathered petitions for Simpson.

Yet the flier said, "The People You Trust, Trust Judge Dawn Jimenez" and included three photos of the judge posing with the smiling elected officials: one with Brennan and Gold, one with deBlasio, and one with Yassky.

The flier does not say who paid for it, a requirement of campaign literature. Jimenez campaign staffer Cole Ettman, who produced the flier, called that an oversight. The flier touts Jimenez as an "Independant (sic) Democrat," a misspelling indicating it was hastily produced. But otherwise, the flier looks rather professional.

Also surfacing just before the election was a flier excerpting from a New York Times endorsement of Simpson, edited to make it appear the paper had endorsed Jimenez. Jimenez, interviewed on primary day on the corner of 7th Avenue and 1st Street in Park Slope, about 10 feet from her opponent, said she never saw that flier, which some of her supporters distributed by hand. Jimenez herself was handing out a different flier that included a complimentary statement about her in the Times piece but that did not suggest she'd been endorsed by the paper.

But Simpson said Jimenez had earlier handed out the flier with the photographs of the elected officials. Simpson promptly called Brennan, who quickly arrived and chastised Jimenez in a manner that for the assemblyman was unusually animated. Jimenez stopped handing out that flier, but deBlasio said nearly all of her campaign workers continued to do so, despite requests that they cease.

Brennan and deBlasio rushed to print and distribute statements denouncing the flier before the polls closed. Yassky was told about the flier but did not see it on election day. However, the next day, when told what the flier said, Yassky commented, "I think that suggests an endorsement and I think that's very inappropriate. It's misleading, plain and simple. It's certainly unethical to mislead voters." The councilman, a professor of law, said of Jimenez, "I believe she's an honorable person, so I'm not making any assumptions about who put it out. But it was inaccurate."

Ettman denied that. "I stand by the literature," he said. "We didn't imply that these people endorsed Dawn. They took a picture with Dawn. They were happy to do that. Politicians take pictures with people all the time.

"And in no way did we imply that she was endorsed by any newspapers that she wasn't. We took out the relevant excerpts." Well, consider for yourself the implication of these two sentences from the paper's endorsement of Simpson: "These are our Civil Court recommendations for Tuesday's election … Dawn Marie Jimenez, is an incumbent

Housing Court judge whose performance suggests she is well prepared for elevation to Civil Court." Asked if Jimenez had approved that literature, Ettman said, "The candidate does not always see every piece of literature." (Not a direct answer, but we'll take it as a "no.")

Should Sheepshead Bay attorney Alan Rocoff bear any responsibility for the literature? He was described by two Jimenez campaign staffers as the person in charge of the campaign, yet he told us, "I didn't get involved in the literature end of things … I'm in the legal end of things."

But he seemed very familiar with the controversial flier and acknowledged that he played a role in putting a quote from Gold on it. "I was the intermediary, maybe, because Jake and I know each other forever," Rocoff said.

Gold said he complained to Rocoff, who replied that he'd captured the spirit of what Gold said upon introducing her at a candidates forum about six months ago. Gold said Rocoff, during their conversation, never denied producing the flier. Gold recalled saying something complimentary about each candidate he introduced at the forum hosted by his Democratic club last spring.

But he was shocked to see himself quoted on Jimenez's literature saying, "I know Judge Dawn Jimenez to be an outstanding jurist whose integrity is beyond question. She is a credit to the bench." "He kind of paraphrased my words and used that as a quote. Somehow he turned that into an endorsement," Gold said. "That kind of thing should not happen and Alan Rocoff ought to know better." Rocoff said, "There was no intent to claim an endorsement … Maybe there was a lack of clarity. Maybe in the rush of things there was a miscommunication. "To the extent that there was any implication, that there might have been a mistake, the campaign offers an apology for that."

Brennan continued his curious habit of not returning our calls, but we did hear back from deBlasio, who fumed about the literature. "It's very disturbing," he said. "This is a real cheap shot."

He said he had no idea where the photo-in which he poses with his hand around Jimenez's shoulder-was taken, noting that he'd run into her at numerous events in recent months. Said deBlasio, "Often in [campaign] literature people simply show a picture of themselves with someone. It's one thing to put a picture in, which is not always appropriate but people do it, but the wording in this [Jimenez flier] absolutely implies an endorsement." He explained, "There's a difference between aggressive tactics and inappropriate tactics. And this one crosses the line. So does the New York Times literature."

The councilman said Jimenez's literature people "hurt the reputation of their candidate." Jimenez spokesman Hank Sheinkopf said he had not seen the questionable handouts. Sheinkopf said Jimenez lost the election because she didn't raise enough money and didn't get the Times endorsement.

He added that the competitive City Council race in East Flatbush and two judicial races in mostly black areas brought to the polls many black voters, who were more likely to vote for Simpson. Three other less competitive Council primaries in black areas (won by incumbents Al Vann, Charles Barron, and Tracy Boyland) also helped Simpson.

That was only partially offset by two competitive Council races in Latino neighborhoods where Jimenez ran strongly.

Rocoff said Jimenez lost because turnout was low on the southern perimeter of Brooklyn, where she expected to outpoll Simpson. With no Council primaries being contested, polling places were virtually deserted on September 9.

Ettman, who ran Susan Lasher's campaign against Assemblywoman Adele Cohen in 2002, said Simpson's bigger war chest allowed her to significantly outmail Jimenez. "ShawnDya Simpson had the money and the support of the county organization," Ettman said.

Over all, Simpson got about 60 percent of the vote to Jimenez's 40 and won by approximately 10,000 votes in an election with turnout barely over 10 percent. Councilman Lew Fidler, who supported Simpson, said Jimenez's Times flier cost her dearly in some neighborhoods.

"Jimenez's use of the Times logo and the implication that the Times had endorsed her backfired tremendously," Fidler said. "They knew the Times had endorsed Simpson. It creates a credibility issue." DeBlasio expressed surprise at the attack ad that arrived in mailboxes a few days before the election. That literature portrayed Simpson as a New Jersey resident hand-picked by embattled Assemblyman Clarence Norman, the Brooklyn Democratic leader. Specifically, it said Simpson "lives in New Jersey" and "doesn't vote in New York."

"I have never voted anywhere else," said Simpson, who lives on Jay Street in downtown Brooklyn. Simpson did live in New Jersey for a while, even as she worked in Brooklyn, because she was seeking better services for her special-needs child.

Similarly, Jimenez grew up in Brooklyn, moved out (to Manhattan) for a number of years, and then returned to the borough. Simpson was indeed supported by Norman, but was endorsed by some of Norman's bitterest enemies, who were persuaded that she was running an independent campaign.

"I think [the mailing] is unusual and I think it was also a really unfair piece because ShawnDya had such broad support," said deBlasio, noting that judicial candidates rarely go negative. He said the ad may have cost Jimenez votes. "The public is really sick of negativity. People want civility," deBlasio said. "Negativity can absolutely backfire."

Simpson said she was shocked that Jimenez would tarnish her own reputation with such literature, which Simpson contended is not allowed by the canons that govern judicial candidates. Simpson said she would consider reporting the matter to the relevant disciplinary bodies.

Ettman leveled some charges at Simpson's campaign, as well, saying Simpson's husband threatened "to beat the crap out of me," in a dispute over a Jimenez campaign poster. "We blew up the endorsement piece to 3-by-4 and we attempted to hang it up across the street from a polling site, and ShawnDya's husband and his goons came around stating that what was written on the flier was incorrect and therefore it had to be torn down," Ettman claimed.

Another Simpson staffer went around with a camera threatening to take photographs of Jimenez's literature distributors, saying what they were handing out was illegal, Ettman reported. "These were not politicos," Ettman said of Jimenez's street workers. "These were college-age interns."

"What happened on election day was disgusting," Ettman said. Despite losing the primary, Jimenez returns to her job as a Housing Court judge, where she's serving a five-year term.

The Gravesend resident said two days before the election that the campaign had been exhausting and that if she lost, she would not run for Civil Court again. Simpson advanced to the November 4 general election, where she is certain to win. She would begin her 10-year term in Civil Court in 2004 and start with a $125,000 annual salary.

BAD TIMES FOR TAITT, BOUCHER It had to be disappointing for City Council candidates Sam Taitt and Omar Boucher when The New York Times endorses their opponent, Erlene King, in the race to unseat incumbent Kendall Stewart. But even more embarrassing, the Times didn't even mention Taitt or Boucher in its assessment of the candidates. Instead the paper devoted a long paragraph to King, describing her as "a Guyana-born community leader who has worked as an immigrants' advocate and helped to increase H.I.V. and AIDS awareness." The paper added that King "demonstrates a confident grasp of the issues and seems eager to work for improved services and economic development."

Unfortunately for King, an endorsement from the Times meant nothing in East Flatbush next to the $122,000 that Stewart collected to promote himself. King, by contrast, had raised just over $11,000 at press time, and was still waiting on over $10,000 in public matching funds. She got all of 600 votes on primary day, finishing last.

Boucher garnered about $26,000 and Taitt an impressive $84,000. Taitt actually had many more contributors than Stewart-372 to the incumbent's 234-but Stewart's donors gave in larger chunks. The average Stewart donor contributed $215 while Taitt's average gift was $56.

BYRD IN THE HAND Insiders knew weeks in advance that Francis Byrd would be Democratic county leader Clarence Norman's pick to be the new male district leader in the 57th Assembly District, succeeding the late James Davis. Indeed, Byrd was given the position in mid-September.

Byrd actually submitted enough signatures to run for the position in 2002, but withdrew at the last moment because he didn't want to siphon votes from the incumbent, Norman ally Bill Saunders, thus handing the election to Davis.

Davis won anyway, but Byrd's gesture is now being repaid by Norman with the district leadership. He would have to run for reelection next year.

Having Byrd as district leader benefits his close friend Chris Owens's future run for Congress, which will occur whenever Owens's father, Rep. Major Owens, retires. As district leader, Byrd can build a stronger political organization in Prospect Heights and Fort Greene to support a Chris Owens candidacy.

Owens, incidentally, has already begun what he calls "exploratory fundraising" for his campaign, though he believes his father will run for reelection next year.

The younger Owens also reaffirmed his pledge not to enter Congress through the back door, namely by his father withdrawing after petitioning ends so his committee on vacancies could name Chris to take his place on the ballot. "As a reform Democrat with a reform record, I pledge that-barring some totally unforeseen circumstance-there will be no last-minute back-room candidate switches," Owens e-mailed us. "I believe in giving people a chance to make their preferences known at the polls with appropriate notice. I also believe in earning my victories."

PRINCE NELSON WILL DO, THANKS City Councilman Mike Nelson didn't duck the issue when we asked how he responds to accusations that he's not ambitious enough: "Probably guilty as charged," he said. "I've never had a strong ambition to go to the throne," Nelson said. "I don't care if I'm the king. I wouldn't mind being one of the princes, though," since it would allow him to deliver more for his constituents. He added, "I am seeking that in my passive-aggressive way."

Having won his seat in a 1999 special election to succeed Anthony Weiner, who jumped to Congress, Nelson-by a quirk in the term-limits law-stands to be the senior councilmember in a couple of years. Yet he chairs no important committees and has no desire to be speaker. Nelson said the major reason he ended up with lousy (our word) committee assignments from Speaker Gifford Miller is that Nelson had backed Angel Rodriguez over Miller for the job.

PROOFREADER NEEDED Assemblyman Bill Colton's aide Carmine Santa Maria issued a press release demanding that Coney Island Hospital become a "stoke (sic) center."

At first we thought it a typo. But upon looking up the second definition of "stoke" in Merriam-Webster, we wondered if perhaps it was a Freudian slip by the corpulent Santa Maria. According to the dictionary, stoke can mean "to feed abundantly." Santa Maria lives just a few minutes from the hospital and might well have been thinking subliminally about a "stoke center" nearby.

NO FUN IN THE SUN FOR RECCHIA Do you believe newspaper columnists have hidden agendas? City Councilman Domenic Recchia does, at least in the case of the New York Sun's Errol Louis.

Louis relentlessly chastised Recchia for knocking Tony Eisenberg off the ballot. We pressed Recchia for his thoughts on why Louis was so harsh. The councilman hesitated to answer, but eventually revealed that he believed Louis was still angry that Democratic county leader Clarence Norman failed to endorse Louis in his 1997 council race against Mary Pinkett and James Davis.

So now, Recchia believes, Louis is knocking Recchia for taking Eisenberg to court and is tying the case to Norman.

It seemed like a stretch to us. Louis's council race was six years ago, and Louis couldn't have expected Norman to support him over the incumbent Pinkett anyway. Still, we gave Louis a chance to respond. Here was his reply: "Actually, I stumbled across the Eisenberg case completely by accident, while waiting to cover other election cases being heard in the same courtroom. What did it for me was to see a dozen or so elderly and partly disabled Russian-Americans subpoenaed and dragged into court day after day, to be hassled by Mr. Recchia's lawyer (Bob Muir) while (Democratic Party executive director) Jeff Feldman watched approvingly from the front row of the gallery.

"None of these immigrant senior citizens could speak more than two words of English, and all of them appeared utterly baffled about the whole business, in which they were being accused of fraud for circulating petitions bearing Mr. Eisenberg's anglicized name. I am paid to have a point of view, and my opinion is that going after these people in this fashion was a disgraceful, divisive thing to do, and a perfect example of why so many voters have run out of patience with County and the fearful incumbents who rely on its protection.

"Not only was my view not motivated by petty politics, it was widely shared. Councilman Recchia's questionable decision to tie up Mr. Eisenberg and his supporters in court all summer, rather than simply demolish them in a fair fight at the polls, was publicly criticized by Senators Carl Kruger and John Sampson, Assemblyman William Colton, Congressman Anthony Weiner, and the editorial pages of the Daily News and the New York Sun. It seems that beating up on old people, even one's political opponents, isn't very popular. But that's just my opinion."

Contact Brooklyn Politics at (718) 399-3693.

Borough Politics Archive

2003
September 8 column.
September 1 column.
August 25 column.
August 18 column.
August 18 column.
August 11 column.
August 4 column.
July 21 column.
July 14 column.
July 7 column.
June 30 column.
June 23 column.
June 16 column.
June 9 column.
June 2 column.
May 26 column.
May 19 column.
May 12 column.
May 5 column.
April 28 column.
April 21 column.
April 14 column.
April 7 column.
March 31 column.
March 24 column.
March 10 column.
March 3 column.
February 24 column.
February 17 column.
February 10 column.
February 3 column.
January 27 column.
January 20 column.
January 13 column.
January 6 column.

2002
December 30 column.
December 23 column.
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
Novemer 25 column.
Novemer 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.
October 28 column.
October 21 column.
October 14 column.
October 7 column.
September 30 column.
September 23 column.
September 16 column.
September 9 column.
September 2 column.
August 26 column.
August 19 column.
August 12 column.
August 5 column.
July 29 column.
July 22 column.
July 8 column.
July 1 column.
June 17 column.
June 10 column.
June 3 column.
May 27 column.
May 20 column.
May 13 column.
May 6 column.
April 29 column.
April 22 column.
April 15 column.
April 8 column.
April 1 column.
March 25 column.
March 18 column.
March 11 column.
March 4 column.
February 25 column.
February 18 column.
February 11 column.
February 4 column.
January 28 column.
January 21 column.
January 7 column.

2001
December 10 column.
December 3 column.
November 19 column.
November 12 column.
November 5 column.
October 22 column.
October 1 column.
September 6 column.
September 4 column.
August 30 column.
July 23 column.
July 2 column.
June 25 column.
June 11 column.
May 28 column.
May 21 column.
May 14 column.
May 7 column.
April 30 column.
April 23 column.
April 9 column.
April 2 column.
March 26 column.
March 19 column.
March 12 column.
March 5 column.
February 26 column.
February 19 column.
February 12 column.
February 5 column.
January 29 column.
January 22 column.
January 15 column.
January 8 column.
January 1 column.

2000
December 25 column.
December 18 column.
December 11 column.
December 4 column.
November 27 column.
November 20 column.
November 13 column.
November 6 column.
October 30 column.
October 23 column.
October 16 column.
October 9 column.
October 2 column.
September 25 column.
September 18 column.
September 11 column.
September 4 column.
August 28 column.
August 21 column.
August 7 column.
July 31 column.
July 24 column.
July 17 column.
July 10 column.
June 26 column.
June 19 column.
June 12 column.
May 15 column.
May 8 column.
April 24 column.
April 10 column.
March 13 column.
March 7 column.
February 21 column.
February 14 column.
February 7 column.
January 31 column.
January 24 column.
January 17 column.

1999
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
November 25 column.
November 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.