Political Party:
Democratic Party
http://www.normansiegel.com
Candidate Submitted Biography:
In 1968, Norman Siegel, a recent graduate of New York University Law School, accepted a position with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Southern Justice & Voting Law Project. His charge: use the courts to end the systemic exclusion of African Americans and women from jury pools in counties throughout South Carolina, Florida, Virginia and Alabama. It was this immersion in civil rights and civil liberties that helped forge Norman’s abiding commitment to insure the rights guaranteed in the United States Constitution extend to all Americans, regardless of race, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender.
During this period, Norman became involved in two high-profile voting rights cases, Hadnott v. Amos, a U.S. Supreme Court allowing ballot access to 89 predominately African Americans candidates, and In re Herndon that resulted in the conviction of a Greene County (Alabama) Probate Judge for violating the 1965 Voting Act. In addition, Norman served as co-counsel in Levy v. Parker, a case that challenged the constitutionality of a high-profile court martial.
Joining the Youth Citizenship Fund, Inc. as Executive Director in 1972, Norman led the effort to register thousands of young, newly eligible voters. In 1973-74, as the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) Field Director, he spearheaded the historic New York campaigns for both the impeachment of President Richard M. Nixon and passage of the New York State Equal Rights Amendment. He served as co-counsel in the historic Holtzman v. Schlessinger United States Supreme Court case, an attempt to halt the bombing of Cambodia. In 1978, Norman was named Project Director for MFY Legal Services, Inc., a community organization that assists Manhattan residents who live below the poverty line.
In 1985, the New York Civil Liberties Union named Norman Siegel Executive Director. For the next 15 years Norman was on the frontline in some of New York City's most critical civil rights and civil liberties struggles: the creation of an independent Civilian Complaint Review Board; the successful defense of the Brooklyn Museum’s right to exhibit controversial art; the fight for citizens' access to the steps of City Hall; the battle against involuntary hospitalization of people with mental illness; the struggle for improved community-police relations and greater accountability on the part of the NYPD.
In private practice since 2002, Norman’s work in civil rights and civil liberties law continues. He has represented the Williamsburg 7, Brooklyn activists arrested when protesting the closing of their local firehouse, and the Nyack 10, filing a suit for the right to obtain marriage licenses for same-sex couples. He is counsel to the West Harlem Business Group in their fight against the use of eminent domain in Columbia University’s expansion plan, and was counsel for Develop - Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, the group of community residents fighting the use of eminent domain to condemn private property in the Atlantic Yards project. Norman has also advocated for and represented:
Skyscraper Safety Campaign and Firefighters Families, advocates for enhanced safety programs and tested, reliable, state-of-the-art communications equipment for firefighters;
Families who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001, in their successful quest to obtain the public record of materials, including 911 emergency tapes and transcripts*, arguing the case in the New York Court of Appeals in February 2005;
Republican National Convention arrestees held for more than 24 hours – filed habeas corpus petition*;
The World Trade Center Families for A Proper Burial*,
The bicycle riders of Critical Mass.
Born in New York City and raised in Brooklyn, Norman graduated from NYC public schools and is committed to restoring excellence in pubic education. From 1989 to 2002, he co-taught “Civil Rights & Race Relations” at his alma mater, New Utrecht High School. Norman is a frequent contributor to many of the City’s major newspapers and appears often in broadcast media, contributing to and enriching the debate on civil rights, race relations and civil liberties. A board member of the Jackie Robinson Foundation for over 30 years, he is also a founding board member and treasurer of the Amadou Diallo Foundation. Each July 4th Norman reads the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Norman and his wife live on Manhattan’s Upper West Side and he is a proud grandfather.
Question 1: The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's website reports: "In New York City, obesity is epidemic: more than half of adult New Yorkers are overweight (34%) or obese (22%). Data show that obesity begins early in life: nearly half of all elementary school children and Head Start children are not a healthy weight. In New York City, 1 in 5 kindergarten students, and 1 in 4 Head Start children, is obese." Do you believe that increasing walking and biking in New York City would improve public health? If yes, what types of programs and policies would you pursue? 1. Yes, if New Yorkers exercised more, obesity rates would decrease; walking and biking are among the most practical forms of exercise. Because childhood obesity is such a gripping problem in our city, the fight begins in our schools, where we could implement bicycling and walking regimens into physical education programs, and perhaps a “Bike To School” initiative to complement “Bike To Work Day”. As a civil liberties lawyer, I have defended the bicyclists of Critical Mass against ongoing police harassment and confiscation of their bikes. Creating a bike-friendly city doesn’t just call for defending the constitutional rights of bicyclists, but also expanding their right-of-way on the road. Transportation Alternatives has had great success convincing the city to open bridges to bikes; the Verrazano Bridge should join their ranks, since it was designed accordingly. We need to expand bike lanes all over the city, and drivers need to respect them, which may well require increasing fines for blocking or parking in them. Finally, bicyclists need to have access not just to roads, but also to buildings, so I support legislation granting bike access to office buildings with freight elevators and requiring commercial landlords to provide bike storage.
Question 2: What is your vision for New York City's transportation network? What needs do you see and what steps will you take as the Public Advocate to help ensure that New Yorkers have access to affordable, convenient and healthy modes of transportation? 2. The backbone of my campaign and my desire to serve as New York City’s Public Advocate is my vision for how this unique elected position – the only position in America that represents the people against the government – can operate as an example of democracy in action. The City Charter specifies in section 24g, “The public advocate shall establish procedures for receiving and processing complaints, responding to complaints, conducting investigations, and reporting findings, and shall inform the public about such procedures.” Whether you’re a bicyclist or a straphanger, the Public Advocate’s office should be a mechanism for you to air your grievances and have them addressed by city government. I would hold public conferences/town hall meetings throughout the five boroughs to allow residents to give feedback about obstacles they face in transportation. I would recruit, train and supervise hundreds of volunteers (assistant Public Advocates) to participate in weekly intakes at housing developments and senior centers, to reach people who may be less forthcoming about their problems, and understand the most basic lapses in government services and city infrastructure.
Question 3: New York City's senior citizens make up a disproportionate number of the city's pedestrian injuries and deaths. What would your office do to protect senior pedestrians on our streets? 3. Early this year I helped launch a group called the Senior Outrage Coalition; transportation issues remain a chief concern of seniors. I commend Transportation Alternatives for its pioneering proposal of Safe Routes for Seniors, which effectively addressed the concerns of senior pedestrians through improvement to sidewalk design and traffic laws, as well as amenities for senior bus riders. Seniors currently make up 1/7 of NYC’s population, a fraction that will multiply in coming years, and our city has not made preparations to deal with the sobering reality of the service we will need to provide to these people. Doing our due diligence in advance by ensuring all sidewalks and bus stops are senior-friendly will pay off when we aren’t caught off guard years from now. I strongly believe that my vision for the Public Advocate’s office, sending volunteers to senior centers on a biweekly basis to hear and relay their concerns, will help alert city government to recurring complaints that could become major infrastructural crises as seniors become a larger demographic. Finally, the fact that many instances of pedestrian injury involve car accidents only reinforces the need for more bike lanes, which form a safe barrier between pedestrian and automobile traffic.
Question 4: What relationship do you see between vehicular congestion on New York City's streets, highways and bridges and the quality of life for its residents? As Public Advocate, are there policies that you would pursue to reduce congestion? 4. Air quality is an important environmental and public health issue, and has a direct link to vehicular congestion. I take it seriously as one more reason to promote public transportation and bicycling. For cars already on the street, we can more strictly enforce laws on the books regarding idling and blocking the box. There is room for the Public Advocate to educate people about these laws, and to positively reinforce the benefits of following them. The anti-idling law in particular should not be seen as a merely punitive measure; if followed, it ultimately saves drivers the money they would otherwise spend on gas. The search for parking accounts for a lot of traffic, particularly in already-congested areas; we need to implement studies that have been undertaken regarding proper rates for parking meters, and make rates more flexible to reflect the desirability of a given parking spot. Parking meters will always be a source of annoyance to motorists, but we must understand that parking spaces are metered as a deterrent to long-term parking and the congestion it causes. The abuse of government-issued parking placards in Lower Manhattan is also a real issue, and I have given legal advice to individuals who were subject to police harassment after photographing such abuses.
Question 5: In an effort to increase the safety, enjoyment and health of New Yorkers walking, running, skating or riding a bike in Central and Prospect Parks, car traffic has been gradually restricted on the loop drives within these parks. What do you think of these changes? Do you have an opinion on the idea of completely closing these loop drives (not crosstown transverses) to cars and reserving them strictly for recreational users? What effect do you think such an action would have on the people in surrounding neighborhoods? 5. Central Park is my favorite place in the city, and restricting the traffic on the loop drives has had a positive effect on its wonderful atmosphere. I am also cognizant of the health and safety benefits of keeping traffic out of a recreational area, as well as the benefit of reducing congestion citywide. I support closing the loop drives to cars, as their destinations can all be accessed by other routes. I believe this measure has gained widespread community and political support, and the benefits of preserving parkland as a discretely recreational space and reducing traffic congestion will greatly outweigh the inconvenience of certain motorists needing to take an alternate route.
Question 6: According to the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, in 2007 speeding was a contributing factor in over 3,000 motor vehicle crashes in New York City. Furthermore, the same data showed that the top human contributing factor to the 264 fatal crashes in New York City during 2007 was also speeding. Given these figures, what measures, if any, do you support to redress this problem? 6. On the most basic level, the law must be enforced. The reason speeding is against the law is because it endangers lives, and individuals who speed, and certainly those whose reckless driving actually causes injury, should have to face the consequences. As Public Advocate I would actively analyze the statistics with regard to speeding in order to ascertain how selectively it’s being enforced, and what improvements could be made in both investigating and reporting speeding. As a civil liberties lawyer, I am intrigued by automated enforcement mechanisms such as photo radar, because it addresses the concern many would have of racial profiling. The use of red-light cameras to capture automobiles running red lights is okay from a civil liberties perspective because the cameras only focus on the license plate – they do not capture who is in the car and don’t present a civil liberties privacy issue.
|
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
