• 5 for CNY - Learn How
  • Crouse Weight Loss 530 x 75
  • Land Bank - Restoring Properties
  • Mannion for NY_Vote on Nov 5th_Horizantal General Election
  • NYSF Urban CNY Banner 530 x 75
  • Second City 530x75
  • Malmgren Concert Duke Ellington

Celebrating Urban Life Since 1989

  • 5 for CNY - Learn How
  • Crouse Weight Loss 530 x 75
  • Land Bank - Restoring Properties
  • Mannion for NY_Vote on Nov 5th_Horizantal General Election
  • NYSF Urban CNY Banner 530 x 75
  • Second City 530x75
  • Malmgren Concert Duke Ellington
Cover Stories Neighborhoods News Syracuse - East Westcott (east)

An Open Letter to Onondaga County Executive J. Ryan McMahon from Dustin M. Czarny Onondaga County Elections Commissioner (D) Reapportionment Committee Member

Please accept this as my public comment for tomorrow’s hearing as I am unable to attend due to Board duties: Mr. County Executive, I am submitting this written comment in lieu of appearing at the public hearing scheduled for 11 am on Friday.  With the election certification process underway, as an elections commissioner for Onondaga County, I cannot take time out of my work day to attend this hearing.  I believe many Onondaga County citizens who want to comment on this important decision are in the same situation as me.  This is one of the many reasons why I am writing today to urge you to veto the legislative lines passed in a partisan manner that sit on your desk today.  The people of Onondaga County deserve better than the maps that were produced in this flawed and rushed process. For three years, the people of Onondaga County have been asking for a more transparent and less partisan redistricting process that will result in fair maps.  They petitioned the Onondaga County Legislature and City of Syracuse Common Council in 2019 to replace their partisan processes and put citizens in charge of truly independent redistricting commissions.  The City of Syracuse and an overwhelming majority of the County legislators promised to do so.  The City of Syracuse fulfilled their promise; however, the Onondaga County Legislature did not enact meaningful legislation to reform the redistricting process. This inaction set up our county to repeat the past mistakes and deliver a flawed potentially illegal product.  The Onondaga County Legislature and chairman of the County reapportionment committee compounded that mistake by choosing to rush the current process, effectively prohibiting the community input, in-depth analysis of demographic and voting data, and public scrutiny required to yield a fair map.  This rush was entirely unnecessary.  The County Charter clearly states the legislature could take up to six months after the delivery of data from the decennial Census to appoint the members of the commission.  Instead, the legislature chose to initiate the Commission within a month and provided only 72 hours to find commissioners willing to serve.  The County Charter clearly gives the reapportionment commission 3 months to redraw the lines.  The Chair of the commission unilaterally demanded the work be done in less than a month.  The County Charter allowed the legislature 3 months to then consider the maps.  The County Legislative Chairman once again decided to accelerate the process calling a special session of the legislature 10 days after receiving the maps forcing a party line vote to approve them.  This rushed process is entirely unnecessary because no map adopted by the Commission will take effect before the 2023 election cycle. Throughout this entire rushed process, the public has been united in calling for more time and a bi-partisan resolution to this important 10-year decision.  The failure to heed their warnings has resulted in a flawed map that divides communities and fails to consider the impact on the voting strength of communities of color, quite possibly in violation New York state law and the federal Voting Rights Act. The Commissioner failed to give the public adequate time to review and analyze the maps, let alone an opportunity to provide the kind of thoughtful feedback this weighty process demands.  Two public hearings were held before any draft maps were even released.  The other three public hearings were held within 72 hours of their release.  During this time the Redistricting Commission’s chair, Mr. Hulslander, could not meet even his own deadlines for releasing the maps.  Despite an agreement to release the data underlying each map at least 24 hours before the October 27th Committee meeting, the Republican Commissioners did not release their map until just 90 minutes before and even then the data was incomplete.  For the November 3rd voting meeting Mr. Hulslander set a deadline of Friday October 30th at noon for final maps.  This was just two hours after the final public hearing.  Even so Mr. Hulslander once again failed to meet his own deadline as the GOP continued to change the data underlying their map until hours before the November 3rd meeting.  This failure to adhere to even their own rushed deadlines—let alone objectively reasonable deadlines—kept the public from having an opportunity to weigh in and point out flaws that need to be addressed. The Reapportionment Commission and Legislative leadership made no attempt to negotiate or compromise their proposed maps to accommodate input from Democratic Commissioners or the public.  The map that sits before you today is not substantially changed since it was initially introduced on October 27, in spite of the overwhelming criticism from the public hearings. The maps submitted by the Democratic Commissioners, Sharon Moran and myself, were offered as a first draft meant to be altered and negotiated in response to feedback from other commissioners and the public with the intent of reaching a compromise, consensus map.  We asked for more time to get more public input.  We were refused.  We asked for actual negotiations between commission members on a compromise map.  We were refused again.  We believe, and still do, that a negotiated map that reflects the equal participation of all commissioners participate and, most importantly, addresses the need and concerns of the community will be a better path forward than adopting this clearly flawed map. City of Syracuse Legislative Map Onondaga County Legislative Map This map is flawed.  Inside the City of Syracuse, this map cracked the only majority-Black district in the County Legislature into white-plurality districts without any explanation.  This map pairs city districts in 7 & 17 with portions of Dewitt reducing the opportunity for minority representation and needlessly dividing both City and Dewitt communities.  This map pairs inner city districts with the Town of Geddes in district 8.  District 15 connects the valley of Syracuse with the University and Westcott neighborhoods, communities that have little in common.  They create an essentially new inner city district in 9 connecting the little Italy section of the North side

Read More
Business News News

Senator May Introduces “New York Local News Act”

Albany, NY – Senator Rachel May (D-Onondaga, Madison, Oneida) is proud to announce she has introduced the “New York Local News Act” (S.7510). This act would establish a system for supporting innovation in delivering local news and civic information in New York State in partnership between the state, SUNY and CUNY campuses, and local non-profit organizations. This act would establish a commission with staff, including an executive director, program officers, and administrators who will collaborate with partners to provide grant funding for innovative ways to support local news outlets and delivery. The bill specifies that grants must be made with metrics in place to ensure effective evaluation and editorial independence for appropriate projects. Local media organizations are a valuable source of information for citizens all over New York. In the past 15 years, 25% of the country’s newspapers have closed. Half of all counties in the United States have only one newspaper, while many of the rest have none.  With shrinking revenues and the financial effects of COVID-19, many newspapers are closing for good. Without local media organizations, people are left in news deserts where they are not aware of the issues in their communities. The coronavirus pandemic provides an important example of the need for more local media. The media acts as the gatekeeper of information and as a source of trustworthy news that people turn to. However, in many news deserts, community members turn to social media where misinformation is rampant. Local media provided community members with up-to-date COVID19 case numbers and information on testing and vaccination sites. Local media also plays an important role in our democracy. The media covers elected officials, new legislation, and provides a check on the government. This is essential to democracy because it makes constituents more informed, which will aid them during elections. This bill would help New Yorkers be more informed on the most pressing issues facing their communities. People still tend to trust their local media outlets more than national media outlets, but for many counties, there may not be any local media or just one. By working with universities and local communities, this bill provides targeted help for communities and underserved populations that need help the most. Investing in local media will benefit our democracy and help keep misinformation out of communities. “The decline of local news sources has left our residents and communities without access to critical information,” said Senator Rachel May. “Local news has always been the tether that keeps people engaged, informed, and connected to where they live and those around them. Whether it’s the local Little League’s scores, the conversation at this week’s Town Board meeting, or the location of the next local vaccine clinic, this information is vital to a thriving community. This legislation will help begin to rebuild trusted local news sources across the state so that we may all be better informed on what is taking place in our towns and neighborhoods.”

Read More
Business News Urban CNY Money

Consumer Alert: Attorney General James Issues Warning Against Marketing Schemes Aimed at Trapping Consumers into Recurring Payments

AG James Provides Tips to Consumers to Avoid Being Tricked into Unwanted Charges   AG James Warns Industries That New York Law Requires Most Industries to Allow Consumers Who Enroll Online to Cancel Online New York – New York Attorney General Letitia James today issued an alert to New Yorkers reminding them to take precaution when presented with deceptive marketing offers that may unwittingly result in recurring charges. This kind of marketing, known as negative option marketing, comes in several forms. Each contains a term or condition under which a seller interprets a consumer’s silence or failure to take affirmative action to reject a good or service or to cancel the agreement as acceptance or continuing acceptance of the offer. “Consumers should never be tricked into paying recurring charges for goods and services that they are not aware of and did not authorize,” said Attorney General James. “As consumers continue to suffer the financial harms of COVID-19, the last thing companies should be doing is making it harder for consumers to end a service. We encourage any consumer who has been unwittingly trapped by these offers to file a complaint with our office, as we will do everything in our power to protect New Yorkers’ wallets.” One example of negative option marketing involves a so-called “free” or low-priced trial offer, where consumers are offered a trial period of a product or service. To receive the trial, consumers are required to submit their payment information, such as a credit or debit card number. However, the trial has additional terms and conditions — which may not be clearly or conspicuously disclosed to the consumer — stating that unless consumers cancel the goods or services by a certain date they are agreeing to continue to receive and pay for them. Often, once consumers discover that they have been unwittingly charged, many companies make it difficult to cancel, resulting in consumers incurring additional charges until they succeed or give up trying. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently issued guidance on this topic, which provides consumers and businesses with the FTC’s interpretations of federal laws and regulations in this area. Earlier this year, New York’s Automatic Renewal Statute, GBL § 527-a, became effective, which provides important consumer protections and adds to the tools available to the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) to combat problems with this type of marketing. Under both federal guidance and New York’s laws, businesses engaged in these negative option marketing tactics must follow three key requirements Clear and Conspicuous Disclosures Material terms of the offer must include, among other notices: That consumers will be charged for the good or service and how much, That those charges will increase after any applicable trial period ends, That the charges will be made on a recurring basis, unless the consumer timely takes steps to prevent or stop such charges in a timely manner, if applicable, and How to prevent or stop such charges. Internet disclosures should be unavoidable, meaning consumers need not take any action, such as clicking on a hyperlink or hovering over an icon to see it. Written disclosures, including on the Internet, should appear immediately adjacent to the means of recording consumer consent to the negative option feature and should appear before consumers make a decision to buy. Informed Consent The consumer’s acceptance of the negative option offer should be obtained separately from any other portion of the entire transaction and should not include any information that interferes with, detracts from, contradicts, or otherwise undermines the consent process. A “pre-checked box” does not constitute affirmative consent. Simple Cancellation Processes: It must be just as easy to cancel as it was to sign up. Consumers should be allowed, at minimum, to cancel using the same method they used to enroll, i.e. if consumers accept an offer online, they should be able to cancel online. Consumers should not be subject to new offers or attempts to “save the sale” that impose unreasonable delays on the cancellation effort. New York requires most industries that allow consumers to purchase goods or services via online enrollment to allow consumers to cancel online as well. In December 2019, Attorney General James co-led a coalition of 23 attorneys general from around the nation in urging the FTC to adopt greatly needed regulations to prevent consumers from being deceived by negative option marketing schemes. In a letter to the agency, Attorney General James and the coalition argued for the FTC to use its rulemaking authority to further expand existing negative option regulations. As part of its recommendations, the coalition recommended that consumers should be allowed to cancel their membership using the same method they used to enroll. The FTC guidance issued late last month states that the FTC is still considering various options, including rule amendments. Consumers who feel they have fallen victim to a negative option marketing scheme are encouraged to file a complaint on the OAG website or call (800) 771-7755. The OAG has also settled a number of matters involving deceptive recurring fee-based membership programs, including settlements with dietary supplement manufacturers, an online language learning program, an online apparel seller, and a credit monitoring program.

Read More

Local, State & National


Resources

Neighborhoods

Features

Contact Us