News that the special election to replace just-moved-on Public Advocate Tish James will cost city taxpayers $23 million ought to bolster the campaign of Curtis Sliwa — the only candidate pledging to abolish the office.
As The Post reported last week, the Board of Elections expects the Feb. 26 balloting to cost $15 million. Meanwhile, taxpayers could shell out $8 million in matching campaign funds for 20 or more candidates.
That’s $23 million to fill a job controlling an office whose budget is just $3.5 million a year — an office, moreover, that’s likely the most useless in city government.
Useless, that is, except for its occupants, who have all (with the honorable exception of Betsy Gotbaum from 2001 to 2009) spent their tenures aiming for a higher office. James, for example, left to become state attorney general.
As we’ve pointed out repeatedly, the post has next to no actual responsibilities, so there’s no pressure to actually achieve anything.
At least 20 candidates (and counting) have registered with the city’s Campaign Finance Board and are off and running for the job. And, thanks to Mayor de Blasio and the City Council, most candidates can now look to collect $8 in taxpayer funds for ever dollar they raise in small donations.
That’s up from a 6-to-1 match. (Ex-Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito can “only” get that level of support — because she’s rolling over funds raised under the old rules.)
Plus, thanks to a quirk in the City Charter, February’s special election will be followed by a whole ’nother round of balloting — both a primary and a November general election — later this year.
City Councilman Kalman Yeger (D-Brooklyn) is among those co-sponsoring legislation to get the office abolished. “I know I’m not the only one who believes there are far better ways to spend New Yorkers’ hard-earned tax dollars,” he says.
De Blasio (an ex-advocate who made good) opposes the measure. But Council Speaker Corey Johnson has said that he’d take a closer look at the need for the post.
“I think New York taxpayers will be rightfully disgusted when they get the final bill for all this nonsense,” says Yeger. The rapid series of costly elections makes this “exactly the right time to have a conversation about ending this 30-year experiment.”
The new Charter Revision Commission should end the need for three separate elections in a single year to fill city vacancies: Let the winner of a special finish out the unexpired term, at least for posts other than the mayoralty.
And if Yeger can’t get his bill passed, the commission should recommend a public referendum on eliminating this drain on taxpayers.
The good that an advocate occasionally does simply isn’t worth maintaining this gravy train for political hacks looking to punch their tickets on the way up the ladder.
