Court Strikes Down NYC Mayor’s Emergency Executive Orders Propping Up Pandemic Open Restaurants Program

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MAYOR URGED TO PRIORITIZE TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN OUTDOOR DINING PROGRAM

New York, NY (August 2, 2023) In a long-awaited decision, State Supreme Court Judge Arlene P. Bluth declared the Mayor’s emergency executive orders suspending local laws to allow for continuous outdoor dining in New York City violate the state law which limits the permissible triggers and length of any such mayoral decrees. The unambiguous ruling calls into question the future of the Temporary Open Restaurants Program as the City Council is poised to vote on controversial legislation making permanent the unlawful program.

Judge Bluth's scathing critique of Mayor Adams’ Executive Order sends a clear message: "The local laws suspended by the executive order required that certain areas, like sidewalks and streets, are public places and not places for private establishments to run their businesses." The court unequivocally rejected any notion of unchecked executive power, stating, "This court declines to embrace a theory of judicial review that would permit unlimited actions by an executive without any check by the judicial branch."

The ruling exposed the mayoral order's wholly inadequate justification for suspending local laws. Judge Bluth concluded: "The court finds that this executive order fails to offer a rational justification for suspending [twenty-six] local laws to permit outdoor dining. Simply put, the Court finds that the order did not sufficiently explain why an emergency exists that requires the suspension of certain local laws."

The court agreed with the thirty-four petitioners from across the city who claimed that the emergency economic conditions used to justify the mayor’s overreach no longer exist. Judge Bluth minced no words, stating, "The problem here is that respondent has not adequately explained that an emergency involving an immediate or imminent danger still exists to justify the suspension of local laws."

As a result of the court’s ruling, the City may not rely on emergency orders to support its beleaguered Temporary Open Restaurants Program. Simply put, Temporary Open Restaurants has no basis in law and should immediately be phased out.

Attorney Michael Sussman, representing the petitioners, noted, "For two years, we have fought to preserve the rule of law and the dignity and peaceable enjoyment of our streets for the residents of [the City]. Today, the State Supreme Court has dealt a blow to the unjust Temporary Open Restaurants Program, which was precariously propped up by two bankrupt executive orders. The Temporary Open Restaurants program is without legs or stilts or any other support and should now be dismantled.”

"The City Council, not the Mayor, must act if New York City is to have a legitimate Open Restaurants program,” asserted Sussman. “We demand that the City Council adheres to lawful processes, including a proper environmental review, which they have conveniently neglected for more than two and a half years.”

"It is high time the city stops doing end runs around transparency and environmental review. The City Council has one choice: do the right thing, or we will see them in court," added Leif Arntzen for CueUp, a leading advocacy group.

Today’s ruling makes clear that the architects of the Open Restaurants program have cut corners and sidestepped lawful procedures in keeping a pandemic program in place long after that emergency ended.

“Accountability is paramount in the governance of our city," said Leslie Clark, a spokesperson for CueUp. "The way to get this right is by conducting a comprehensive Environmental Impact Study, free from the influence of special interest lobbyists. This is an opportunity for Mayor Adams and the City Council to demonstrate a commitment to developing a dining program that works for all New Yorkers.”

Read Judge Bluth’s ruling on e-Track:

Index No. 156328/2022

For media inquiries, interviews, or more information, please contact:
Leslie Clark | 646-761-8620
Leif Arntzen | 917-930-8508
Attorney Michael Sussman | 845-590-8102

Email: cueup.ny@gmail.com

DINING IN THE GUTTER IS HERE TO STAY!

May 22, 2023

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Residents Outraged as NYC City Council Prepares to Wreck Neighborhoods with
Lobbyist-Driven Permanent Outdoor Dining Legislation

Community Leaders Call on City Council Members of Conscience to Kill Bill 31-B

New York, NY (May 22, 2023) Last week, the NYC City Council released a new version of the outdoor dining legislation that they’ve been crafting in backroom meetings with industry and special-interest lobbyists.

Intro 31B serves as a stark reminder of who is really in charge within the council chambers. Lobbyists had multiple seats at the table, residents had none.

Not a single public hearing was held on 31B, or its predecessor 31A – while political insiders and special interests lobbyists are bragging about how they have manipulated the Mayor and City Council. Democratic majority leader Keith Power spoke of “months of tricky discussions.” Open Plans director Sara Lind thanked all those who worked “diligently behind the scenes." And Hospitality Alliance chief Andrew Rigie crowed about how “two years of discussions and negotiations with the Mayor’s administration and the City Council” allowed his legal counsel to write the legislation.

The result of those two years of backroom dealings: a bill that grants the hospitality industry and bike lobbyists nearly unrestricted control over every inch of New York sidewalks and streets. This neighborhood-wrecking legislation doesn’t even leave crumbs on the floor for residents who once generously gave their support to local restaurants. Even a quick read reveals the damage Intro 31B will wreak on New Yorkers’ quality of life.

• Intro 31-B is anywhere and everywhere legislation. Any restaurant can open a sidewalk or roadway cafe anywhere it wants. There are no caps on how many outdoor dining setups can be on any block. The sky’s the limit! And the legislation makes no distinction at all between commercial corridors and small residential side streets where people live and sleep – or tried to sleep at night.

• Restaurants can have amplified music until 12:00 midnight everywhere and anywhere. Who cares if kids, elders, and working people never get a single night of sleep? Not our elected officials who apparently don't care if people have to get up to go to work at 6AM on less than 8 hours of sleep.

• Only roadbed dining is seasonal and, according to the City Council, “seasonal” is bizarrely defined as 8 months. Roadway dining set-ups will have heavy barriers. So our streets will now be swept only in the winter months. That summer scent of garbage and standing water? Look forward to more!

• The Department of Transportation which has thoroughly bungled the temporary pandemic open restaurants program for the last three years, will be fully in charge of running the permanent program, controlling the licensing, and setting new rules. Yep. The same agency that failed to enforce any of the temporary rules for the last three years.

• Restaurant fees for use of public space will start at $5 per square foot annually — less than the price of just one latte — while the mayor is gutting the budgets of libraries, senior centers, pre-K, and public schools.

• And 31B keeps the plastic and plywood sheds on our streets until November 2024.

Put it all together: Intro 31B highlights the distressing reality that the Mayor and City Council are more responsive to the demands of special interest groups than to the concerns and well-being of the people they are elected to serve.

Residents are now calling on City Council Members with any conscience to Kill Bill 31B.

Contact:

Stu Waldman | 646-823-3056
Leif Arntzen | 917-930-8508
Kathy Arntzen | 917-821-2591

Email: cueup.ny@gmail.com

New Yorkers Push Back on Mayor Adams's Broken Plan for Permanent Outdoor Dining

March 24, 2023

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

New Yorkers Push Back on Mayor Adams’s Broken Plan for Permanent Outdoor Dining

Just released “Community Blueprint for Outdoor Dining” protects neighborhoods and supports equitable, expansive outdoor dining citywide

New York, NY (March 24, 2023) As the City Council considers legislation to make the pandemic-era outdoor dining program permanent, a citywide coalition of community organizations released their own neighborhood-friendly proposal — the Community Blueprint for Outdoor Dining.

Pushing back on the top-down, lobbyist-driven restaurant legislation favored by the Mayor, neighborhood leaders note that the proposed legislation will saddle their communities with an additional 18 months or more of the blight of unregulated roadway and sidewalk setups.

The proposed legislation also reduces Community Board input on outdoor dining sites, perpetuates the environmental harms communities have experienced under the pandemic emergency program, and, incredibly, allows for fines as low as “zero dollars” for unlicensed, illegal outdoor restaurants.

The community plan, based on more than a year of consultation with New Yorkers across the city, protects residential neighborhoods and calls for:

• A seasonal sidewalk cafe program with reduced hours or operation to ensure quiet in residential areas.

• Climate-friendly bans on heating and air-conditioning outdoor cafes.

• Equitable sliding-scale license fees and a proportionate distribution of sidewalk cafés citywide and within neighborhoods.

• An end to all roadway dining to enhance street cleaning, decrease emergency vehicle response times, and reduce rat infestations.

• Restoration of the pedestrian right of way with a 12-foot minimum sidewalk width for any sidewalk café.

• An end to the failed management of outdoor dining by the Department of Transportation.

Read the one-page blueprint here.

Read the detailed seven-page policy proposal here.

Contact:

Leslie Clark | 646-761-8620 Leif Arntzen | 917-930-8508

Email: cueup.ny@gmail.com

An Open Letter to New York City Council Speaker Adrienne E. Adams

January 11, 2023

Appellate Court Decision Overturns Lower Court Ruling on Timing Technicality

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TWO-PAGE APPELLATE COURT DECISION OVERTURNS LOWER COURT RULING ON TIMING TECHNICALITY

Leaves environmental hazards of the NYC Open Restaurants program open to future legal action

NEW YORK, NY (October 5, 2022) Yesterday’s two-page appellate ruling on Arntzen et al v City of New York failed to address the environmental impacts of the City’s controversial Open Restaurants program. Instead, the decision concerned itself exclusively with the timing of the petitioners’ initial filing — and said nothing about the merits of the case. The court's decision merely delays the reckoning on the City's end-run around New York State's Environmental Quality Review law.

The negative environmental impacts of the City's pandemic-era program are evident throughout the five boroughs, impacting thousands of New Yorkers. The court is not disputing that fact.

The Appellate Division simply stated that it "need not address the merits of petitioners’ challenge to the City's action" - leaving the door wide open for future legal action challenging the Permanent Open Restaurants program that will soon come up for a vote by the 51-member NY City Council.

"Opening this process to the public and soliciting its response would have doomed the proposal and embarrassed those who supported it,” noted Michael H. Sussman, attorney for the petitioners.

New Yorkers deserve to have a City government and elected officials who abide by our environmental laws, which require public review and comment. We are considering all legal avenues available to us and look forward to re-filing our action when the City has completed the Permanent Open Restaurants legislation. The fight to protect our public space from privatization, to safeguard our environmental laws, and to rein in unbridled government overreach is far from over.

Attorney Sussman concluded, "Having failed to follow the procedures set forth under state law for a project of this magnitude, the City is left with only one option: self-congratulation."

Case:  KATHRYN ARNTZEN et al v. CITY OF NEW YORK 

New Yorkers Ask the Court to Shut the Open Restaurants Program

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PETITIONERS CITYWIDE ASSERT THAT SELECTIVE EMERGENCY ORDERS ARE EXECUTIVE OVERREACH

NEW YORK, NY (July 31, 2022) Residents from Brooklyn to the Bronx, from Manhattan to Queens, have filed an Article 78 lawsuit to end renewals of the emergency executive orders that authorize New York City’s temporary Open Restaurants program, and to end its operation. 

The Open Restaurants program has been operating since June 2020. For nearly 26 months, this “temporary” program has circumvented both the zoning code and the New York City Charter through repeated renewals of emergency executive orders.

Representing the group is distinguished civil rights attorney Michael H. Sussman, Esq., who is also pursuing a separate action against the proposed Permanent Open Restaurants program. “Lawful conduct starts at the top. Public legitimacy depends on our leaders telling the truth,” said Sussman. “Executive orders extending the ‘temporary’ Open Restaurants program circumvent the law. The City has failed to comply with the processes state and city law contemplates when programs of this magnitude are considered and, instead, fenced out public participation. Our second lawsuit is a frontal attack on this lawlessness.”

Residents who were supportive of restaurants during the crisis that made temporary outdoor dining necessary say that the cumulative negative impacts on their neighborhoods are destroying their quality of life, and the abuse of executive power must end.

While New York state and city have suspended or abandoned all other pandemic emergency orders and programs — including test-and-trace, vaccine and mask mandates, home food deliveries for the elderly and shut-ins, and free hotel rooms for those with COVID who need to self-isolate, eviction protections, and enhanced unemployment benefits — emergency orders continue to be selectively issued for the benefit of the restaurant and nightlife industries.

Brooklyn Community Board 4 Chair Robert Camacho noted, “Mayor Adams says the emergency is over. He says everybody’s got to go back to the office to work. He wants everyone back at their workplaces — and we want our streets back. We want the restaurants open, but we don't want the sheds destroying our streets and neighborhood.”

“The Mayor's decision to keep renewing an emergency order for the hospitality and liquor industry that is no longer needed serves as another reminder that residents' quality of life and safety are not priorities, or perhaps, even seriously considered,” said public school teacher and Lower East Side resident Patrick Walsh.

“The bars/restaurants have simply taken over the streets,” said Hell's Kitchen petitioner Trina Semorile, a senior citizen with mobility impairments. “The willingness of politicians to allow this, at the expense of residents, harms the public at large, other businesses, and the ability of residents to the peaceful enjoyment of our homes.”

“Our lives are being harmed and disturbed with every emergency renewal that allows the sheds and sidewalk cafés to park in our neighborhoods,” explained Deborah Gonzalez, a petitioner and advocate for affordable housing and homeless services. “The emergency order that needs to happen right now is for our streets to be cleaned up and made safe, permanent housing for the homeless, and better subways.”

Case: DOUGLAS ARMER et al v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al

Download Press Release PDF

Contact: Leslie Clark

Phone: 646-761-8620
Contact: Cheri Leon

Phone: 518-304-4521
Email: cueup.nyc@gmail.com

Judge Rules for NYC Residents in Open Restaurants Lawsuit, Calls for Environmental Impact Review

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

JUDGE FRANK NERVO CALLS NEW YORK CITY’S ACTIONS “ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS” AND ORDERS A COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The ruling effectively nullifies the City Council’s Zoning Text Amendment which would have permitted outdoor dining on nearly every street in the city.

NEW YORK, NY (March 23, 2022) The Supreme Court of the State of New York, with Judge Frank Nervo presiding, ruled in favor of 22 New Yorkers who claimed that the many negative impacts of the Open Restaurants program required an environmental review.

In a strongly worded ruling, Judge Nervo dismissed the City’s argument and rebuked its actions: “For a taxpayer supported agency to declare, in effect, the Open Restaurants Program and Outdoor Seating have no negative impact on our streets and communities because that Agency has unilaterally made that determination serves only as a thinly-veiled attempt to avoid statutory scrutiny of the program by a baseless claim of its own omnipotence.”

Today’s ruling affirms that the agency in charge, the Department of Transportation, was mistaken in its claim that there would be no negative impact to New York City neighborhoods from this program, attempting to skirt the need for proper and thorough environmental review.

The petitioners’ attorney, noted civil rights lawyer Michael Sussman, stated: "The NY State Supreme Court today affirmed the rule of law against those who would rush through programs intended to radically change this great City. Major zoning changes cannot be implemented without careful study, not pre-judgment. And, this law applies to small towns, villages and to this great City.”

The city had been moving rapidly to make the pandemic emergency outdoor dining program permanent. The City Council held a single hearing in early February and two weeks later voted to obliterate decades of zoning regulations that had prohibited outdoor dining in residential districts. The Supreme Court ruling means that the city will effectively have to start over, beginning with a thorough environmental impact review as required by state law.

“This case was about more than Open Restaurants; it was about following our land use process,” said noted city planner George M. Janes. “If an action has the potential for significant environmental impacts, those impacts have to be studied and disclosed in all projects, even those that the Mayor wants to get done quickly. I'm glad Judge Nervo agreed.”

Petitioner Deborah Gonzalez of the Lower East Side reacted to the ruling: “When our government is not doing the right thing by us we have to demand it. I’m so grateful for the Judge’s decision. Those of us who’ve lived with noise, trash, rats, and crowded streets and sidewalks for 18 months felt gaslighted when the DOT said that there were no negative impacts on our lives.”

The petitioners’ attorney Michael Sussman added: “To the extent municipal leaders do not comply with the law, the people must force the issue. An independent judiciary is critical to the rule of law and that has been made very clear today. I am proud today of the many throughout the City who have stood against lawlessness and for careful scrutiny of the impacts of open restaurants. Now, the real work begins.”

Case: KATHRYN ARNTZEN et al v. CITY OF NEW YORK: DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION

Media Contact: Leslie Clark

Email: leslie@westvillageresidents.org
Phone: 646-761-8620

22 Neighborhood Leaders Slam DOT Survey and Outreach on Permanent Open Restaurants Program

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(DOWNLOAD PDF)

Contact: Avery cueup.nyc@gmail.com

AN OPEN LETTER TO NYC DOT COMMISSIONER HENRY GUTMAN, CONCERNING HIS AGENCY’S FAILED PUBLIC OUTREACH EFFORTS ON THE PROPOSED PERMANENT OPEN RESTAURANTS PROGRAM

NEW YORK, NY (December 21, 2021)

Dear Mr. Gutman,

The majority of New York City community boards — 29 of 46 that filed a recommendation — considered and disapproved the DOT proposal that will lead to the permanent takeover of sidewalks and roadways for the expanded use of restaurants. In spite of that resounding community response, your agency is now engaged in a far-reaching PR campaign that attempts  to cloak your controversial outdoor dining program in the guise of universal “popularity.” It won’t work. Your program is not popular. And your “public outreach” plan is a sham. 

All aspects of the DOT’s supposed “public outreach” campaign – the “survey,” the five borough board meetings, and the virtual roundtables – are deeply flawed. Indeed, none of the components of the “public outreach” program even come close to accurately gathering the views and experiences of the citizens, voters, and residents of New York City.

The “survey” is the worst of the three:

1. This “survey” can be filled in multiple times by anyone who wishes to do so. Your agency could have easily created a survey with a “single-response” limit. Instead, you chose to have no limit to responses. In fact, when completing your “survey” there is an automated link to “return to the form” so that individuals are encouraged to complete the form again and again. This promotes ballot-box stuffing.

2. Not only could this “survey” be filled in multiple times by one individual, but it could also be filled in by individuals anywhere in the country, and indeed, anywhere in the world. Even a simple computer script – a bot – could fill out this “survey” to secure the answers supporting the financial interests of industry stakeholders that have shaped this program since its inception.

3. Since this “survey” (and the proposed roundtables) are entirely digital, the DOT’s process excludes New Yorkers without internet access from conversations about the future of their streets and sidewalks. We find serious fault with this form of survey taking and public outreach because it limits who can participate based on technology access.

4. Residents' input has been minimized by the structure of data collection. This “survey” has two tracks or branches: one for restaurant owners and workers – the other for those who “dine at open restaurants” and those who “live, work or frequent a neighborhood with open restaurant (sic).” This structure minimizes residents’ input by reducing them to one-third of just one out of five categories – hardly a fair way of measuring the impact of this program on those who endure its noise, vermin, and lost public sidewalks.

Any “survey” that is so heavily weighted in favor of one industry – and not its workers and not its neighboring businesses and not the residents – is not designed to create, as the city’s administrative procedures require, “a level playing field between the agency and the public.” Therefore, this survey should not be used to make public policy that may effectively privatize our common public landscape forever. This survey should be stopped, and its flawed, distorted results erased.

The borough board notifications on the DOT website are also an insult to the notion of “public outreach.” None of the four borough boards listed [Staten Island is simply unscheduled] have links that the public can use for more information. And the information provided by the DOT on your agency’s web page is simply inaccurate.

1. The Queens Borough Board was listed as in-person on the Borough President’s website. In fact, it was by Zoom only and by invitation only.

2. The Brooklyn Borough Board was listed as occurring at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December 7. In fact, it took place at noon that day.

3. The Manhattan Borough Board was listed as occurring on Friday, December 17 at 9:30 – while the actual DOT briefing took place where no reasonable person would think to look for it: the Manhattan Borough President Vaccine Task Force meeting on Tuesday, December 7 at 3:00 p.m.

4. The Bronx Borough Board “outreach” was not a public meeting. Even the link to view the meeting on YouTube was not made public in advance of the meeting.

This is not informing the public. It is hiding from the public.

The Virtual Public Roundtables again sideline the city’s residents. While the DOT is engaged in private, closed-door meetings with “stakeholders” in the restaurant industry, your agency is offering only two Virtual Public Roundtables for the eight million citizens of New York City.

Surely the people who live and work in New York City deserve to have a greater voice in any far-reaching transformation of their public space.

We call on the New York City Department of Transportation to immediately

• address the grave concerns raised by the twenty-nine Community Boards that voted against this dangerous initiative

• scrap the sham “survey” that the DOT is conducting

• engage in immediate and rigorous enforcement of all existing rules governing the Temporary Open Restaurants program

• commission a robust and independent study of the environmental impacts of the proposed Permanent Open Restaurants program

We look forward to your timely response to our concerns.

Sincerely,

Kathryn Artnzen, President, Central Village Block Association

Diem Boyd, Founder, LES Dwellers

michele campo, President, Bowery Block Association

Leslie Clark, West Village Residents Association

Tamara Daley, Orchard Street Block Association

Lynn Ellsworth, Humanscale NYC

Chris Giordano, President, 64-67 Streets Block Association

Michael Kenna, President, 67 West 87th Street HDFC

Jan Lee, The Chinatown Core Block Association

Micki McGee, South Village Neighbors

David Mulkins, President, Bowery Alliance of Neighbors

Katherine O'Sullivan & Maggie Clarke, Inwood Preservation

Shannon Phipps, Berry St. Alliance

Nancy Preston, Moving Forward Unidos

Sandy Reiburn, President, Preserve Our Brooklyn Neighborhoods

Susi Schropp, 8 Saint Marks Place Tenants Association

Steve Starosta, President, Kimon Retzos, Secretary/Treasurer, W. 15th St. Block Association

Elizabeth Sabo, West 10th Street Residents Association

Sean Sweeney, Director, SoHo Alliance

Stuart Waldman, Bedford Downing Block Association

Judith Zaborowski, 9th Street A-1 Block Association*

Stuart Zamsky, East Fifth Street Block Association

* for identification purposes only

cc:

Eric Adams, Brooklyn Borough President and Mayor-Elect

Adrienne E. Adams, NYC Councilmember, District 28

Erik Bottcher, NYC Councilmember-Elect, District 3

Brad Lander, NYC Councilmember, District 39

Mark Levine, NYC Councilmember, District 7

Christopher Marte, Councilmember-Elect, District 1

Francisco Moya, NYC Councilmember, District 21

Carlina Rivera, NYC Councilmember, District 2

Ydanis Rodríguez, NYC Councilmember, Council District 10

Rafael Salamanca, NYC Councilmember, Council District 17

Deborah Glick, NYS Assemblymember, Assembly District 66

Harvey Epstein, NYS Assemblymember, Assembly District 74

Brad Hoylman, NYS Senator, Senate District 27

Brian Kavanagh, NYS Senator, Senate District 26

Tammy Melzer, Chair, Manhattan CB-1

Jeannine Kiely, Chair, Manhattan CB-2

Alysha Lewis Coleman, Chair, Manhattan CB-3

Lowell Kern, Chair, Manhattan CB-4

Steven Brown, Manhattan CB-7

Cicely Harris, Manhattan CB-10

Nilsa Orama, Manhattan CB-11

Eleazar Bueno, Manhattan CB-12

Dealice Fuller, Chair, Brooklyn CB-1

Robert Camacho, Chair, Brooklyn CB-4

Lori Willis, Chair, Brooklyn CB-10

William Guarinello, Chair, Brooklyn CB-11

Yidel Perlstein, Chair, Brooklyn CB-12

Barry Spitzer, District Manager, Brooklyn CB-12

Lucy Acevedo, Chair, Brooklyn CB-13

Jo Ann Brown, Chair, Brooklyn CB-14

Theresa Scavo, Chair, Brooklyn CB-15

Saul Needle, Chair, Brooklyn CB-18

Betty Bryant-Brown, Chair, Bronx CB-1

Evonne Capers, Chair, Bronx CB-6

Laura Spalter, Chair, Bronx CB-8

Joseph Russo, Chair, Bronx CB-10

Marie Torniali, Chair, Queens CB-1

Lisa Deller, Chair, Queens CB-2

Gene Kelty, Chair, Queens CB-4

Elizabeth Braton, Chair, Queens CB-10

Michael Budabin, Chair, Queens CB-11

Nicholas Siclari, Chair, Staten Island CB-1

Robert Collegio, Chair, Staten Island CB-2

Frank Morano, Chair, Staten Island CB-3

Download Press Release PDF

Residents File Legal Challenge to New York City Agencies’ Finding of No Adverse Impacts of Permanent Open Restaurants

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(DOWNLOAD PDF)

Contact: Avery cueup.nyc@gmail.com

ALARMED RESIDENTS SAY “PREPOSTEROUS” CITY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GLOSSES OVER UNCONTROLLED BLIGHT, TRASH, NOISE AND CONGESTION STEMMING FROM OPEN RESTAURANTS

Press Conference: Thursday, Oct. 21, 11:00AM Intersection of Ludlow & Rivington Sts.

NEW YORK, NY (October 18, 2021) Concerned New York City residents are opposing an arbitrary, flawed determination by the City of New York that the proposed Permanent Open Restaurants program would have no significant environmental impacts citywide.

Many residents have suffered increased blight, noise, trash, traffic congestion, as well as rodents, since the Open Restaurants program started sixteen months ago. The group says the city’s finding that the program has “no adverse impacts” runs afoul of the reality on the ground, and needs further review as the city rushes toward making the program permanent.

Representing the group is distinguished civil rights attorney Michael H. Sussman, Esq.

“I am honored to represent New Yorkers fighting to restore the City to normalcy,” said Sussman. “Our sidewalks and streets belong to all the people, not those who own or rent bars or restaurants. People have a right to a quality of life. Making this program permanent without accountability would radically diminish the experience of many hard-working residents, sacrificing them and their neighborhoods. The City can do much better. Had the City conducted proper environmental reviews, not negated the experience of the last sixteen months, the proposed expansion of the Open Restaurants Program would be placed on infinite hold.”

According to George M. Janes, AICP, an urban planner with over twenty-five years’ experience, “The City needs to ‘scale back’” to “fully develop the replacement regulations, accurately study their potential impacts, and mitigate those impacts to the extent practicable. This Environmental Assessment Statement and proposal are incomplete, created to meet an artificial deadline that no longer exists.”

“You have only to look around our neighborhoods to see the immediate effects of the ‘Open Restaurants’ program on safety, health, sanitation, and environmental issues,” said Micki McGee, a resident of the South Village. “With 11,950 restaurants participating in the program, that’s a 110-acre giveaway of public land. We need a real conversation on the use of our public space, not a set-aside for one industry.”

In a crisis, New Yorkers came together and rallied around workers and business owners in supporting Open Restaurants. But, the group says, after sixteen months in play, the temporary emergency program forecasts a permanent program will be a disaster for the residents of this city.

“Hell Square on the Lower East Side got a whole lot hotter,” said Diem Boyd, a fellow petitioner and the founder of the grassroots resident advocacy group L.E.S. Dwellers. “The living conditions here are a warning shot for communities across the city about what happens to a neighborhood when bars, restaurants and landlords are favored over residents’ quality of life.”

The petitioners vow to remain vigilant because at the heart of this fight is the occupation of New York City’s public spaces and the right to quality of life.

“I’ve lived in my house for thirty-three years. I’m eighty years old. I always assumed, health permitting, I’d live out my life in my home. The city may make that impossible,” said Stu Waldman, a petitioner and a resident of Bedford St. in the West Village.

For additional information: KATHRYN ARNTZEN et al v. CITY OF NEW YORK

Download Press Release PDF

Outdoor Dining Survey Reveals 93% Are Violating Critical Guidelines

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: cueup.nyc@gmail.com

NEW SURVEY OF OUTDOOR DINING BY NYC COUNCIL SPEAKER REVEALS 93% IN VIOLATION OF CRITICAL GUIDELINES

Critics call survey findings ‘tip of the iceberg’ and demand the City sunset the Open Restaurants program.

New York, NY (August 20, 2021) On August 16, representatives from NYC Council Speaker Corey Johnson’s office presented Manhattan Community Board 2 with a survey of 418 outdoor restaurants in his district. The results revealed that 93% were out of compliance with one or more rules, most of which impact public safety. Among these are:

• Obstructing emergency vehicle access

• Obstructing sidewalk access for the disabled  

• Obstructing bike lanes

• Blocking fire hydrants

• Blocking road signage

• Blocking gas and electric utility access

The Coalition United for Equitable Urban Policy (CUEUP) has issued the following statement:

“Speaker Johnson’s survey reveals only the tip of a very large iceberg. As damning as it is, the survey only covers siting issues. There was no assessment of noise, trash, rats, propane heaters (fire hazard), outdoor electric heaters (climate hazard), or inadequate air circulation (Covid hazard). These are all issues that have plagued the program from the beginning. 

It speaks volumes that after 14 months operating under Open Restaurants, a mere 7% of participating restaurants can manage to follow simple, clearly stated, essential rules. But even if all operators suddenly changed their behavior, there are key elements to the Open Restaurants program that can’t be fixed even with the best of intentions. You can’t widen a street that’s too narrow for both a shed and an emergency vehicle. You can’t stop rats from being attracted to an unlimited source of food. You can’t stop fifty to a hundred alcohol-fueled customers from shouting, laughing, or singing beneath the windows of residents until the wee hours.

Open Restaurants is a fatally flawed program that can only be justified during an emergency. The Mayor is committed to reopening New York. Indoor dining is fully operational, and has been since June. Under these circumstances, there is no longer a need for an unmanageable program that negatively impacts public safety and our quality of life. When the flood recedes, you don’t leave sandbags piled up on the streets. Open Restaurants must have a sunset date.” 

Reference: Office of NY City Council Speaker Corey Johnson, Temporary Open Restaurants Survey Analysis