YU Alum Running for Public Advocate

Jules Polonetsky, a graduate of TMSTA and Yeshiva College, is running for the position of Public Advocate of New York City. He is challenging incumbent Mark Green, who is vying for a second term. Polonetsky is currently serving in the New York State As sembly for the 46th District, which comprises the communities of Brighton Beach, Coney Island, Sea Gate, and Bay Ridge.

Following his graduation from YU, Polonetsky earned his law degree from New York University School of Law. He then practiced law with the Wall Street Firm of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan. In September 1990, Polonetsky served on the staff of Congressman St ephen J. Solarz as district representative to the communities he currently represents. In 1992, Polonetsky acted as Jewish Community Liaison for New York Attorney General Robert Abrams’ U.S. Senate campaign. Subsequent to that campaign, Polonetsky was enl isted as a legislative aide to U.S. Congressman Charles Schumer. In 1994, he was elected to the 46th District Assembly seat in a February special election.

Throughout his political career, Polonetsky has involved himself with a wide range of issues. While working with Congressman Schumer, Polonetsky dealt with New York City issues as well as foreign policy concerns. There he devoted his efforts to the Pol lard case, the Crown Heights difficulties, and aid for Israel. He also had a significant hand in the Congressional passage of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In the Assembly, Polonetsky serves on the Codes, Agriculture, Health, and Housing committe es.

Polonetsky has a record of standing against bigotry and intolerance. After learning that the Nation of Islam was simultaneously distributing propaganda while fulfilling a contract with New York State to provide security for a state-run housing complex, Polonetsky headed the successful effort to have that contract terminated.

The office of the Public Advocate of New York City was created in 1993 to replace the City Council President. The Public Advocate is elected independently and is next in line to the Mayor. He serves as the middleman for the citizens of the city, acting as their representative, thereby allowing them access to the City government. The New York City Charter states that the Public Advocate is responsible for reviewing “complaints... relating to services and programs, and make proposals to improve the city’ s response to such complaints...” Also among the requirements of the Public Advocate is the maintenance of government compliance with the City charter. Mark Green won the first election to the post. He was elected to the newly established office in 1993 a nd began his term on January 1, 1994. The upcoming election is to be held on November 4.

In a somewhat uncharacteristic political move viewed by pundits as yet another example of Republican Mayor Rudolph Giuliani endeavoring to blur party lines in the coming election, the Mayor asked Polonetsky, who is a lifetime Democrat, to join him on a fusion ticket. In response to a Commentator inquiry, Giuliani’s office provided the following statement. Concerning the launch of the partnership, the Mayor asserted that, “Jules Polonetsky, with his Albany legislative experience, understanding of the rich cultural diversity of New York City and abiding commitment to working solely to protect the interests of New Yorkers make him the perfect running-mate.”

The following is a transcript of an interview The Commentator conducted with Assemblyman Jules Polonetsky:

Commentator: What aspect of your Yeshiva University experience was most useful in your subsequent political career?

Polonetsky: One aspect of my Yeshiva University experience that was useful in preparing me for political life was my early morning to late evening schedule. If you’re going to make it in politics, you need to be able to work incredibly long hours. Secondly, the big picture idea of Torah U’madda as a basis for understanding many aspects of life experience has been helpful. I find insights into Judaism in legislative issues. This approach adds a dimension to whatever you encounter. Thirdly, as a legislator who wears a yarmulke while working, I appreciated having had a college environment in which I could comfortably practice my religion. It assisted me in realizing that my religion is part of who I am. YU helps to integrate the religious ident ity with the professional identity.

Commentator: Your campaign contends that you will enjoy greater success in securing federal and state funds for New York City than your opponent will. How do you intend to do so?

Polonetsky: It’s very simple—my opponent doesn’t intend to ask the federal and state governments for more money.

Let me explain my position. Every year, New York City gets shortchanged in Albany. For example, the city school system educates 38 percent of the state’s children, however, we receive only 34 percent of the state education aid. That doesn’t seem like a tremendous difference, but it equals about $300 million each year. That’s a lot of money that could be used to buy more books, computers and to pay for more teachers. Another example is that city residents pay about 66 percent of the tolls collected by t he Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, but a large share of that money goes to subsidize suburban commuters.

What I am saying is that the Public Advocate has an enormous bully pulpit. When the Public Advocate decides an issue is worth talking about, people pay attention to it. If elected, I would use that bully pulpit to focus on the fact that Albany and Wash ington are shortchanging New York [City]. My opponent has used the bully pulpit to focus attention on himself.

So it’s a very easy question to answer. I would do a better job of getting more money from the state and federal governments because I’m the only one who thinks it is an important part of the job.

Commentator: How do you balance your identity as a religious Jewish politician with your responsibility to a wider constituency and range of issues? Does a conflict exist?

Polonetsky: There really isn’t a conflict between my religious beliefs and serving a constituency that includes people of other religions. My Assembly District is the perfect example. It’s made up not only of people of many diverse religions , but many different ethnicities as well. Yet, I have been very popular in my district because I try to do what is right and most people support me for that. I think a very good example of that was when I found out that a Nation of Islam security company was patrolling a state regulated housing complex in my district. They were providing good security, but they were also handing out copies of their racist, anti-Semitic newspaper, The Final Call. I did not think it was right for the state to be supporting Louis Farrakhan. I convinced Governor Pataki to end the contract. Some people may think it was a “Jewish issue” because of Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic record. But Jews, gentiles, and people of every ethnicity supported me for standing up to Farrakhan. If th ere were a similar situation, but the person involved had a record of discriminating against Catholics, Muslims, or any other religious group, I would have done the same thing and people would have supported me for it.

Commentator: What inclined you to cross party lines and join Mayor Giuliani in his bid for reelection?

Polonetsky: Four years ago, when I traveled around this city, to be honest it wasn’t a very pretty situation. People were moving out of this city because drugs and crime were taking over. People did not feel safe, they didn’t want their chil dren growing up here, they felt like the city was unmanageable. If someone said to me four years ago that they were going to make New York the safest large city in the country, I would have said it can’t be done. If someone said I’m going to take on the u nions and the welfare advocates and start a workfare program — I’m going to start a program where people are asked to earn their welfare checks — I would have said it can’t be done. But, Mayor Giuliani made those promises and he has kept them. He has turn ed this city around.

Although I am a Democrat, I don’t want things to go back to the way they were when David Dinkins was the mayor. I want to see the city continue to move forward, I want to see crime continue to fall and I want this to continue to be a city where more an d more people are moving to, rather than away from. That is why I am supporting Mayor Giuliani and why I am honored to be running for Public Advocate as his running mate. He kept his promises and he should be commended for that.

Commentator: When elected Public Advocate, what favorable contributions do you wish to make to the city?

Polonetsky: The Public Advocate has been given the responsibility of being the city “watchdog” — he’s supposed to watch over city agencies and identify problems. My opponent believes that “watchdog” means city “critic.” For the past four yea rs, every time he has discovered a problem, he has written a report and called a press conference so he can get himself some publicity and announce to the world that there is a problem.

I don’t think that this is the most productive way to do things. I will also be the city watchdog. But when I find a problem, I will handle it differently. I will go to the Mayor and tell him that I have found a problem. Then we can come up with a solu tion and announce that we have solved a problem. It may not get me as much publicity as calling a press conference, but I think that is a much better way to contribute to the well-being of the city.

Also, as I have said, I will be fighting to make sure New York City gets its fair share from Albany and Washington. It is not a “sexy” issue, but if we are going to solve the city’s problems, we have to have the money to do it. Remember, I’m not asking for more than our fair share, but right now we send more to Albany than we get back. That’s not right.

Commentator: Why might a voter be inclined to view your candidacy more favorably than that of your opponent, Mark Green?

Polonetsky: There are so many reasons, but let me outline just a few. First of all, Mark Green has already said he no longer wants to be the Public Advocate. Although he is running for re-election, he has already announced that in 1998 he is going to run for the United States Senate. That means that the day he takes office, if he is re-elected, he will be spending a tremendous amount of time traveling around the state campaigning for another job. In fact, he is already doing it. The Public A dvocate is supposed to preside over all City Council meetings, but since he began campaigning for Senate, he has attended only 50 percent of City Council meetings. That is not a very impressive record considering there are only two City Council meetings e ach month. So my first reason is I want to be Public Advocate. I will do the job for a full four-year term and I will show up to work. Mark Green only wants to be the Public Advocate if he doesn’t get the job he really wants. And instead of serving the ci ty, he will spend the first year of a second term campaigning for that job. By the way, if he does get re-elected and then becomes a U.S. Senator, the city will have to spend $5.2 million on a special election to elect a new Public Advocate. I also think it is important for people to know that Mark Green worked for David Dinkins and campaigned for him in 1993 when he lost to Mayor Giuliani. Mark Green supports Ruth Messinger. Do you want the city to return to what it was like in 1993? I don’t, Mark Green does. And that is a very important thing to remember because if anything happens to the Mayor and he can no longer serve, the City Charter says the Public Advocate takes over as Mayor.

Finally, people should know that Mark Green refused to distance himself from Rev. Al Sharpton. When Green was asked who he would support for Mayor if Sharpton were the Democratic nominee, he refused to answer that question. Reporters asked him over and over, yet he still refused to answer. I made it very clear that I do not think that Sharpton is qualified to be the Mayor of this city or of any city for that matter. He is a divisive person who says he is trying to bring people together, but only moves them further apart. I think all responsible elected officials should have done what Comptroller Alan Hevesi had the courage to do and should have said that they would not support Sharpton. Mark Green refused to do that.