Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Holds Media Availability on the Appointment of Benjamin Tucker as NYPD First Deputy Commissioner, 2014 General Election

November 5, 2014

Mayor Bill de Blasio: Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to have, in a short a while, a bill signing ceremony here, so what we're going to do is talk about a couple of areas, take your questions on those areas, and then we'll adjourn and reset for the bill signing for anyone who's staying in for that.

I want to talk about two things. What I'll do is first talk about NYPD and take your questions on that. Then I want to spend a couple minutes talking about the election and take your questions on that – and stick to those two areas.

You know, I want to just talk about NYPD and what we've seen in these last months before talking about Commissioner Bratton's announcement today. I think it is really important to take stock of the progress that's being made – the month of August, the month of September, the month of October, the safest month in each case in over 20 years. Something very powerful is happening, something impressive is happening. The men and women of the NYPD deserve tremendous credit because what they're doing is having a forceful impact on keeping crime low and, in fact, lowering crime rates overall. We've talked about some of the amazing progress in the area of robberies – over 2,000 fewer than last year at this time; murders down, overall crime down. Something is working and working better with each and every month. I give a lot of credit to Commissioner Bratton and his leadership and of course to the men and women of the NYPD for the work they do every single day.

Commissioner Bratton made an announcement today – I think it's a great step forward for the department. I've gotten to know Ben Tucker over the last year. I've been singularly impressed by him. He's an intelligent visionary leader. He has done extraordinary things already in terms of creating a new approach at the police academy – a new approach to training that really emphasizes bringing police and community together – showing officers, who will be the future of the NYPD, how they can have the kind of working partnership with the community that will bring down crime further and will have many many ramifications for what this city will be like in the future. It all begins with the right training and Ben Tucker understands that inherently.

He has a very impressive background and history, starting with being a beat cop, here in New York City – but doing great things not only for this city but also for the nation. He served at the federal level, working on community policing, working on anti-drug efforts; understands profoundly the best and most modern approaches to law enforcement, but also understands law enforcement from the beat cop's point of view, because that's how he started out. He understands policing from the neighborhood point of view. And he's someone who really shares the values of this administration and certainly shares the values of Commissioner Bratton. They've had an extraordinary working relationship. I think he's going to be a great first deputy commissioner. I think the areas that he will focus on will be quintessential to the reforms we're making.

Obviously what we have to do in terms of bringing up the best personnel for the future of the NYPD, diverse leadership for the future of the NYPD, continuing to improve our training and the retraining of the entire department, which will be an area of particular focus for the first deputy commissioner, is going to literally frame how we do this work going forward. So, Ben is recognized as a national leader on law enforcement, and particularly on the progressive vision of law enforcement. He has done this work on – in so many ways – that he brings a richness of experience that particularly fits well in the first deputy commissioner role and fits well the goals of this commissioner. So I think Commissioner Bratton made a great great choice.

It's also very timely because we're about to start a whole new technology initiative that will also change the way this force does its work. And this will be another area where First Deputy Commissioner Tucker will play a leading role. Giving the best technology to each and every officer in the field will change response times, will change effectiveness, will make – as we said when we announced that initiative – every officer a part of our anti-terrorism efforts. It's going to be a sea change for the NYPD and Ben Tucker is going to be a leader in making that come to be.

So I think this is really a good day for New York City, a really good day for the NYPD, and provides us with the leadership we need to continue the progress we're making.

I just want to say a few words in Spanish, and then we'll take questions on this topic.

[Mayor de Blasio speaks in Spanish]

With that, I'll take questions on the commissioner's announcement today.

Question: Mr. Mayor, the commissioner had his own press event just a few – shortly before this one. Why not do these events together? Why are you – why are you commenting on it and why weren't you at his event?

Mayor: The commissioner obviously makes choices about his own team. And I think this has been quite typical of how we've approached a range of agencies. You know, the relevant head of the agency decides their team. I think given how important this decision is to the future of all the efforts we're making to bring police and community closer together and also to keep crime low, it makes sense to speak to it right away. And I think it's a real powerful example of the strength of the NYPD. You know, there was a vacancy that we did not expect and Commissioner Bratton found a great leader to fill that vacancy and I'm very very pleased with his choice.

Question: Mayor de Blasio, given the reporting on some of this, was the first lady involved in the decision-making?

Mayor: No. Anyone else on the commissioner's announcement today?

Question: Two questions. [inaudible] Commissioner Bratton to seek your approval [inaudible] City Hall before he made the announcement? And then secondly, have you spoken – since he's resigned – have you spoken to Chief Banks? [inaudible]?

Mayor: Yeah, on the first question – Commissioner Bratton laid out very thoroughly on Sunday at Gracie Mansion the approach we've taken. He and I talk constantly. We have regularly meetings, but we talk pretty much every day and we're constantly comparing notes. He has given me a sense, over the last few days, of what he was thinking, the different approaches he might take, and asked me for my input, my thoughts, and I felt very comfortable with the way he was looking at things, and I made that clear to him. And I think he said it right on Sunday – he bounces ideas off me, gets a sense of what I'm feeling about them, if I have any other ideas. And then I have great faith in his judgment – he of course makes the ultimate decisions about his own team. On the second question – I did speak to Chief Banks both on Friday and also on Sunday. And I simply said to him that I thought he would've been great in the role, I thought he had a lot to offer New York City going forward, I thought he had done a lot for this city and for the police department over 20-plus years. So I'm certainly saddened that he chose not to, but I do respect his decision and, you know, his own reasons.

Question: Is he someone that you could consider being commissioner someday? Is he someone you'd welcome back to the NYPD?

Mayor: Well, first of all, I don't project what might be in the future. You know, he made a choice. It was obviously a rather momentous choice in terms of a 20-plus year career. I think he made the decision that was time to leave the NYPD by definition. So I don't think that suggests someone who's probably going to chose to come back. But look, I think he's a very very talented guy – I really enjoyed working with him, I think we had a good working relationship. I think anyone who gets to first deputy commissioner by definition is someone who potentially could be a commissioner one day. I think that's self-evident.

Question: Mr. Mayor, due to the questions about diversity around Mr. Banks' departure, did the new choice have to be a person of color?

Mayor: No.

Question: Was there any sort of mandate that it had to be an African American?

Mayor: Not a mandate at all. I mean, I talked again with Commissioner Bratton about his thinking. I thought his thinking was very sound. Again, he and I have a lot of very similar ways of thinking about how to approach the development of a team. I think he's done extraordinary work over decades in developing a team of people that work together. I think – one of the things I give him a lot of credit for is not only what he did when he was first commissioner here in terms of bringing crime down, but the team he built to achieve it – people like Jack Maple, who are now of course legendary. Bill Bratton believes in building a team, building an ensemble – he is very very clear, it's not just about him, and that's part of why great people, you know, gather around him and achieve so much. So we've compared notes constantly on team-building, on how to make changes work effectively. I have great confidence in his judgment, but it was clear from the beginning – it had to be the person who he felt would best serve him in that role – that was the central question.

Question: It's still a little unclear why the need for two separate press conferences – why not just join [inaudible] – ?

Mayor: I think I've said it very clearly. Again, typically, commissioners make announcements about their own team. This has obviously been an area – an issue of great interest, and I wanted to comment on it.

Question: There's already been kind of a tepid response from leaders in the Black community about Tucker. You know, one of the quotes I saw from Representative Jeffries said, you know, the jury's out. And I think the contention was that he's not as connected to the community – at least that's the perception. Do you think he will win people over? [inaudible] –

Mayor: I respect that you've framed that as an opinion, or, you know, one way of looking at what the response has been. That's certainly not the response I've been hearing as I've been talking to people today. I've been hearing a very good response – a lot of people who have worked with Ben Tucker, who have a lot of respect for what he is doing right now at the Academy, which is central to the reforms we're making. Look, I think someone like Ben, who started out as a beat cop, who understands policing from the grassroots, but has also held very very substantial leadership roles in the NYPD and beyond, in the federal government, who really gets the big picture of crime-fighting and the need to bring police and community back together, I think that's exactly what we need in the first deputy commissioner. And I think it may be true that some people don't know him well yet, but I can tell you I didn't know him a year ago, and the last year of working with him, I've been absolutely sold that this is a great leader. And I think as people around this city get to know Ben Tucker, they're going to think very highly of him. He's also someone very easy to work with – he's a very open-minded guy, a very intelligent guy, a very likeable guy. I think people will find him quick – quickly be able to find him a great person to work with.

Question: Commissioner Bratton made a point at his announcement to say "to all those who said I'm leaving, I'm not going anywhere." Do you know why he would say that? And what are your thoughts on it?

Mayor: I think that the commissioner, to his great credit, likes to just set the record straight. That's a lot of what we were trying to do Sunday. There is so much of a rumor mill – the rumor mill is part of human life, we understand that. But we also spoke very bluntly Sunday about some rather purposeful efforts to misinform. So sometimes I think there's a conscious effort to misinform. Sometimes I think, you know, people just get the wrong information and project it. Sometimes the rumor mill becomes more powerful than the truth. I think the commissioner has the habit of saying let me set the record straight – and I think that's a very healthy habit. So I have immense respect for Commissioner Bratton. He is everything I hoped he would be and more as a police commissioner. He is achieving extraordinary things. You will remember – it's kind of hard to forget – what day it is. If you go back a year ago and a couple of days, the question was could you possibly create reform? Could you bring down the number of stops and fix the broken policy of stop-and-frisk and start to bring police and community together and simultaneously keep crime low? And a lot of the going commentary, a lot of the conventional wisdom was those two concepts were opposed, and it was impossible to do both at once. Here we are – November 2014 – crime is low – in fact, the three best months in over 20 years. The stop-and-frisk policy fundamentally changed – stops way down, police and community coming back together. These two things are happening at the same time because of Bill Bratton. And I have great faith in him and I'm thrilled that he's in it for the long haul – and New York City needs him.

Question: [inaudible] whether or not the NYPD will be able to improve relationships with the community being that the two top minority ranking members of the NYPD have resigned. What do you – ?

Mayor: Well, first of all, it is never about any individuals, because we have to be really careful about this. This is two people who happened to serve in those roles in the previous administration. You know, there was a chance given to see what might happen with them in the future. Two different outcomes, but ultimately neither one will be here for the long haul. So I think the fact is those are two individuals in two important positions, but other people will now take those positions, will work closely with the community, will further the program and the approach that we have in place that's working. So I really don't think we can make this about individual personalities or individual leaders. We've got to get the point of – where are we going with the department as a whole? Where are the policies going? Where are the policies going? The policies keep moving forward. The retraining of the department is going to have a huge impact. And at the same time, the approaches that are being taken to reduce crime are working better than ever – that's what matters – not a couple of individuals, but where is the department as a whole going? What are the men and women who do the work every day doing? And they're a great great job. What you're now seeing with the new team, with the commissioner, and the first deputy commissioner, with a new chief of department, chief of patrol, and chief of housing, is one of the most diverse leadership groups in the history of the NYPD – an extraordinarily effective, talented, experienced group – a group that works well together right now. This is – there's no shakedown crews – these are people who've been working together, particularly in this last year, very closely, have a great rapport. Again, the commissioner really values that teamwork, that sense of camaraderie – this group has it. It's a very diverse group that looks like New York City. It's a very effective group. So I think in a few months, if you go back and talk to the same people who have concerns today, you're going to find that having worked with this new leadership, they're going to feel very very good about it.

Alright, let me – let's spend a few moments on the election. A lot could be said about this election – obviously, national level, etc. – and I certainly will take the opportunity to do that over the coming days and weeks, but I want to just focus right now on what the election means for our city, what it means for the goals of this administration, the approach we're taking. The fact is, we feel very very confident that we can continue to achieve in Albany. Few things changed with this election – not many changed ultimately – very similar dynamic to what we faced in the last year in Albany.

In the last year, we feel very good about what we achieved. You'll remember, we started the year with, again, the conventional wisdom assuming that very very little could get done in Albany given my agenda and what we were trying to achieve specifically. At the end of the session in June, we had achieved almost every major plank that we brought to Albany – some in different form than we expected, obviously, but we got it done and feel great about what came out of this legislative session. We expect a similar dynamic next year.

Now, I want to hasten to add – and this is not the conventional wisdom – part of what happened this spring in Albany was not about traditional politics. It was about organizing people. It was about making the voices of the people hard in Albany – something that does not happen that often. Why did we get the outcome we got on pre-k and afterschool? Because of months and months and months of work at the grassroots level. That work will continue and that work will continue to be effective, again, with a Senate in particular that's very little changed from what we experienced this last time.

We believe that the things that are going to predominate in the agenda going forward – obviously education, particularly fairness in education funding and continuation of our key initiatives; affordable housing. These are areas where there is a lot of support at the grassroots – support that can be turned into real impact in Albany.

So, the elections – look, I'm thrilled at what happened in Buffalo. There's a few other seats I wish had gone the other way, but the other fact here is a coalition got built – and again, this is not what I think the conventional wisdom focuses on, but I do – a coalition got built over these last months unlike anything I've seen in the last quarter century. I've been at public life in this city and state for about a quarter century – I have never seen so many crucial leaders and organizations on the same page about the need to turn the Senate Democratic. A lot of you have been around and have seen, over the years, many many people who should've been a part that effort weren't – and including some folks in labor, for example. This year, an extraordinary unity of purpose. Again, history normally showed us massive resource disparities in the State Senate races – this time a very close dynamic on resources. This is all changing the foundations of the politics of our state. It got us only so far this time – much more to come. 2016 – everyone in this room knows – will be a very very different environment, a very propitious environment, a very positive environment for Democrats and progressives.

So a foundation got laid this year – not everything we wanted to get done got done, but a foundation got laid that will now play out very intensely over the next two years – and I feel very good about where that will take us.

With that, I welcome questions.

Question: So, you know, given the fact that there were some rather sweeping defeats, there was also the rather bizarre situation [inaudible] Long Island [inaudible]. The one victory, of course, [inaudible] largely attributable to IEs like teachers unions. With all these sort of very obvious problems and [inaudible], what kinds of shake-up do you believe are appropriate in the leadership of the NYSCC?

Mayor: I'm not going to get into internal leadership structures. I want to just say a couple of broader things. First, I think Panepinto won because of the kind of campaign he ran. I think he spoke about economic issues. I think he ran as a progressive – he didn't run away from those values, he embraced them. And I think that's what allowed him to prevail. I think in terms of the overall dynamics – again, you had a lot of closely fought races and I was honored to work closely with the Senate Democrats. I think we had a very good working relationship and again, I think it has a lot – it says a lot about what's going to happen in the future. People all over this state, regardless of partisan affiliation, understand what's going to happen in two years. I was pretty clear that I would've liked to see more happen this year, but it's going to happen inevitably – and the foundation laid now will have a huge impact on the future. So I think we have a team of folks that we can work with going forward that will be effective. Henry –

Question: [inaudible] was directed at you and it was almost an appeal to voters saying do you want the state to be run by Bill de Blasio and Bill de Blasio's point of view. So how do you take that? I mean, isn't that a loss for the progressive point of view? Wasn't it repudiated?

Mayor: It's – we're talking about a handful of seats that were in play. Again, we're thrilled with the victory in Buffalo where a Republican seat went Democratic. We had a seat in the mid-Hudson that was Republican, stayed Republican. We had a handful of Democratic losses. I don't think there's some macro-trend there. I think the fact is that Democrats got out there with the most coherent effort we've seen in a long time. There's more to be done – it's quite clear. But the Buffalo race is an indication of when you have a clear progressive message and you have if not resource parity, something like it, it proves what Democrats can achieve.

Question: What kind of partner do you expect from Governor Cuomo as you fight for agenda items for the city? [inaudible]?

Mayor: Well, I expect to speak to Senator Skelos later on today. And look, we worked together last time – we're all mature adults here. We knew we didn't agree on some things and we knew that each of us was a partisan who wanted to see our own party prevail – that's normal. But we were still able to get things done and I expect that relationship to continue. The relationship with the governor I've spoken to many times – it's almost a 20-year friendship. Again, look at the batting average of New York City in this last legislative session. We could not be more pleased with what was achieved and I worked very very closely with the governor in the course of these last few months and expect to continue to work closely and continue to get things done together. Marcia –

Question: [inaudible] some Republicans were saying that the election was a repudiation of you and of progressive politics and progressive [inaudible]. [inaudible] one thing for sure – you know, raising the minimum wage is dead. I mean, this is what he said on Election Night. I guess what I would ask you is what is your response to that – to the [inaudible]?

Mayor: I just don't buy it. I just don't buy it. I think you've got to take a bigger view of this. First of all – it's very interesting on a national level that some states that we would consider fairly conservative states voted for – in referendums – voted for an increase in the minimum wage. There's no question that people all over New York State, all over this country are hurting economically and want to see solutions from their government. And the fact that Republicans will not give it to them potentially – you know, it remains to be seen in this state, but certainly historically they've not been willing to – I think is part of why you will see greater change over time. So this was a moment in time. I think the bottom line here is that the Republicans are going to have to think long and hard about how to comport themselves on issues like minimum wage. We're going to go forward with the same agenda that animated this coalition. Again – some of you have watched this very carefully for a long time – there's never been a coalition like this attempting to change the politics of Albany for the long haul. We're going to go forward with the same platform – an increase in the minimum wage, the DREAM Act, the Women's Equality Act, campaign finance reform – none of that's going to change. I agree with you – a lot of Republicans are going to try and resist that. I think they will do that at their own peril.

Question: Just a follow-up. Do you think that this was like repudiation of Democratic party politics that might change in 2016 because you expect a Democrat to run [inaudible] president [inaudible]?

Mayor: Well, I think there's a couple of things – I appreciate the question because I think there's a couple of things happening at once. Anyone who talks – I've been around long enough to see the different cycles of one party's dead, the other party's dead. No one should buy into any of that. I remember 1974 very vividly – as a youth, but a politically interested youth – the cover of Newsweek, I think it was, saying the Republican Party was dead because of the massive sweep post-Watergate election of '74. I've seen that cover – Republican Party dead, Democratic Party dead – nationally over and over again over the last decades. No, what's happening here is, obviously – look at the nation, look at the Senate, look at this state, look at its Senate – very, very close numbers on both sides of the aisle ultimately, right now.

But 2016 is an entirely different dynamic because what's happened, in so many cases, is it really depends on whether Democrats show up. It really depends on whether progressives show up. We know the world has turned so that what is, in so many ways, the operative question. And we know what happens in a presidential year and particularly if the presidential candidate for the Democrats is someone who excites real interest among Democrats and progressives. You could see a massive turnout that will remake the map fundamentally in this state. That piece alone should be perfectly sobering to anyone who's trying to write-off the Democratic Party right now.

And second, again a coalition has been built that will keep organizing for the next two years. Those two factors change the map fundamentally in the long-term – Josh?

Question: [Inaudible] ask you about your allies in the Working Families Party. They put out – I don't know if you saw it – but a very strong statement last night that really blasted Governor Cuomo for squandering millions on a fake party – just to quote. And [inaudible] campaign account as New Yorkers in the Legislature and in Congress were left to wither on the vine. I'm wondering if you [inaudible]. And also, following on what Marcia said, if in 2016, on the top of the ticket, there's a Democrat leading it who's going to inspire people below him or her, was that not the case [inaudible]?

Mayor: First of all, I think on – I have not seen that statement so I can't comment on it having not read it. I think the fact is we still have more work to do. If we know in an off year – it's historically proven whether I like it or not – that a lot of people who share my partisan affiliation and share my values stay home. And we know on the conservative side of the ledger there's been more propensity to turn out. That is one of the factors going on here. But I do think, going forward, again, because there is a strong progressive coalition that's been built. Because we're going to fight over each and every one of these issues – to Marcia's point. I mean, there's going to be a fight over minimum wage by definition. There's going to be a fight over DREAM Act by definition. That's going to energize people anew, and then, on top of that, the dynamics of the presidential year. So, I think this is going to be two years of constant motion and I feel good about where it takes us.

Question: Do you think Governor Cuomo left fellow Democrats to wither on the vine?

Mayor: Again, I haven't read the piece. I would not share that characterization at all. I worked very closely with him throughout this year and I thought there was a lot of unity within the coalition of which he was obviously a key part to achieve a new State Senate.

Question: [Inaudible] ideological verdict. I had a strategic question. Because many of these candidates [inaudible] outside groups that were funding Republican candidates tied them to you specifically – there was a photograph of you on some of the flyers.

Mayor: They have at least used a nice photo. [Laughs] It would have only been sporting.

[Laughter]

Question: I'm curious, given the outcome, what [inaudible] beneficial for the state Democrats. You were very publically working for them, fighting for them, and it ended up hurting some of these candidates because they were being seen as tied to your politics [inaudible].

Mayor: I just don't buy into that whole way of seeing politics, honestly. So if you asking a strategic question I'll give you a strategic answer. I don't think that's how politics works. I think it is about the issues the candidates choose. I think it is about the vision they put forward. I think it's about how they reach people at the grassroots. You know, we had the exact same situation in Buffalo in terms of the efforts to tie people to different things and, you know, put down the Democratic candidate in a variety of ways. The Democratic candidate prevailed with a clear, progressive message and a great effort to reach people at the grassroots. Sadly, that didn't happen everywhere. But no, I think – and I certainly learned something about this last year – I think the politics of endorsement, the politics of association, have much less to do with the way people make decisions and partly because people are dealing with such economic challenges, such tangible challenges in their life – in their lives – that they are looking for meaningful solutions. Actually, I think that's what's missed in a lot of this dialogue. They're looking for meaningful solutions. If someone provides a clear vision of that, that's what actually gets someone interested in voting, particularly in an off-year. So I don't think it's about was there ads with a picture. I think the dynamics were much more foundational in that. Sally –

Question: As there's likely to be a push coming up in Albany to lift the charter school cap. I'm wondering if you could just weigh in on that.

Mayor: Sure, I mean, I've said it before. I think we have a good dynamic right with the cap the way it is. There's still a number of schools in development and I think it's – we've got a balance right now that makes sense. Obviously we're going through a process right now, dealing with a number of charters who have applied here at the city-level. There's a lot more work to be done within the cap we have.

Question: I wanted to ask a question regarding the GOP takeover of the U.S. Congress. Given an agenda that's in part bolstered by federal funding [inaudible] for Vision Zero, infrastructure, transit, subways for which the city's a stakeholder, NYCHA, affordable housing. What about your [inaudible] agenda is threatened with a full GOP takeover of Congress and what is your alternative to achieve some of those goals?

Mayor: I think there's another dynamic here somewhat like the state. Again, it's interesting, the public spin versus what people say behind the scenes. Everyone who pays attention to this knows that 2016 is a very different reality, at the federal level as well. This was a tough year for Democrats, in part, because where the races were run. The way that the staggering of the Senate races occur, the playing field is very, very different in 2016, and much better – presidential year dynamics, much better. So, first of all, I think a lot of people are playing the long-game here and know that this very well could be a two-year aberration. Second – to the core of your question – look, would I have preferred a Democratic Senate majority, yes. But we saw even with a majority of a few seats that a lot couldn't happen unfortunately because of the way Washington is paralyzed because of what's happening in the House of Representatives. So there are going to be some negatives for sure. But I don't think it fundamentally changes our reality. We're going to keep working with the federal administration, which has been willing to work with us regularly. We're going to try to work with both houses of Congress in every way we can. But if the last session was any indication, you know, we don't have unduly optimistic goals of what's going to come out of that.

Hold on, [inaudible] go ahead. You got one before, I'm sorry. These two and then we'll be out.

Question: I was wondering how you felt about Congressman Grimm's win yesterday, especially considering he cited you numerous times throughout the campaign and associated you with Domenic Recchia in a negative way together.

Mayor: Again, it's just not the way I see politics. He was an incumbent, he ran an effective campaign, he had advantages that he played to the fullest. I think that's what happened.

Question: Just shifting to the ballot issues for a second, on the Education Bond Act, give me specifics on how the city might spend on of that money it's getting from the state, any sense of the timeline and when will people get that money?

Mayor: Well first of all, we didn't draw too many specifics because we weren't sure if it would pass and obviously there's been a history of some bond-acts succeed and some don't. So we were certainly not counting those chickens before they were hatched. The way it's configured, I think it gives us immense opportunity to address some inequalities in the school system, to help some schools that are less advantaged to get technology they need. I think it'll be very helpful and will contribute to some of our other key initiatives because if we can add technology in to what we're trying to do with early childhood education, with extended day programs and afterschool, it's going to make them a lot stronger. So I'm very hopeful about what it'll do for the city. It will obviously have hundreds of millions of dollars of impact, but to get you a specific number and a specific plan, we're just not there yet.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: I think, again the money moves relatively fast in these situations so I think some of the impact will be start to be felt in the next fiscal year. But I'd much rather get you a more detailed answer from our Office of Management and Budget.

Thanks, everyone.