|
This is an endorsement form from the Working Families Party driven by issues important to unions, workers, tenants and families. Review for your self Arline Park's position on the issues. We are proud to announce that the local review committee voted overwhelmingly to endorse Arline Parks 10 in favor with 2 abstentions!
Candidate Information Name: Arline Parks Campaign Manager: Mr. Wallace Hasan Campaign Committee: The People’s Committee For Change
Phone (campaign hq): 718-585-1398 (Field Cell) 718-715-5825 Candidate Email: Vidypati@cs.com WEBSITE: http://parksforcouncil.20fr.com Campaign Manager Email: Vidypati@cs.com, parksforcouncil@yahoo.com Office Sought: __City Councilmember__________ District #:______17_____
THE CITY BUDGET We believe that increases in progressive taxes are in general fairer and less economically harmful than service cuts, and expects its endorsed candidates to vote accordingly. In particular, they should support an increase in progressive taxes, which fall most heavily on the rich, including the corporate and personal income tax, the commuter tax and stock transfer tax. All city services have suffered significant cuts in recent years. Given the continued fiscal crisis faced by the City, the --Party believes it would be highly irresponsible to roll back the PIT increases agreed to in 2003. Success in maintaining the City’s revenue base and in closing any budget gap through progressive revenue increases will be a primary criterion for -- Party endorsements in future New York elections. Will you support the following city revenue measures? (check all that apply) _X__ Delaying or canceling the rollback of the 2003 personal income tax increases _X__ Increasing the City personal income tax on the highest earners _X__ Closing corporate loopholes in the City’s tax code _X__ Restoring the commuter tax _X__ Restoring the stock transfer tax In what ways will you work with the --Party to win passage for these revenue measures?(check all that apply) _X__ by sponsoring legislation in the City Council _X__ by holding a joint press conference with the Working Families Party _X__ by lobbying other elected officials GOOD JOBS FOR ALL NEW YORKERS Living Wage In 2002, the City Council passed a Living Wage bill. While the --Party strongly supported this bill, the Party opposed the decision, late in the process, to remove recipients of economic development subsidies from the bill. In the original language, recipients of more than ,000 in subsidies (including tax abatements) or million in tax-exempt bond financing, and owners/managers of buildings leasing 20,000 or more feet to the City, would have been covered on the same terms as City contractors. This would provide substantial raises to over 3,000 janitorial, food service and security workers at a minimal cost to the affected businesses, and would establish the principle that subsidies to businesses need to benefit workers as well. Would you support extending the City’s living wage bill to apply to businesses receiving economic subsidies from the City and leasing substantial property to the City on the same terms as City contractors? _X__ Yes ___ No Would you support setting the living wage for building service workers based on the prevailing industry wage? _X__ Yes ___ No What is your view on a requirement that certain businesses either provide health insurance or pay into a city fund that would provide insurance for their workers? _X__ Support ___ Oppose Do you support Intro. 468, the NYC Health Security Act, which would create such a requirement? _X__ Yes ___ No Right to Organize Unions are necessary to counterbalance the power of employers and defend the interests of workers. The right to join a union is fundamental to a free society. The --Party expects candidates receiving its endorsement to support unions in their efforts to organize workers and win fair contracts. It is not enough to support the right to a union in the abstract; --candidates must be prepared to publicly support unions in conflicts with employers. Will you pledge to honor all picket lines and to publicly support striking workers? _X_ Yes __ No Will you speak at a press event or walk a picket line in support of striking workers? _X_ Yes __ No Will you send a letter urging workers facing a union recognition election to vote “Yes”? _X_ Yes __ No
Will you publicly call on any Westchester employer facing a union organizing drive to voluntarily recognize the union? _X_ Yes __ No
Will you pledge not to oppose unionization of any public employees in your jurisdiction?_X_ Yes __ No Will you use all legal means to deny public funding to businesses or agencies which have opposed efforts by their workers to organize? _X_ Yes __ No Will you support legislation ensuring that no public money goes to “union-busting” law firms – firms with anti-union records? _X_ Yes __ No Do you support the right of all workers to organize without fear of retribution, including temporary workers and day-laborers? _X_ Yes __ No ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Investments in Transportation and Infrastructure To rebuild New York’s economy for the long run, the --Party supports a sectoral approach. The goal of city economic development planning should be to identify key public investments required by those sectors of the New York economy which provide the best employment opportunities for New Yorkers with a variety of backgrounds and education and skill levels. The City’s current approach to economic development involves haphazard subsidies to individual companies with inadequate public scrutiny, no long-term strategy for diversifying the economic base, and inadequate requirements for companies receiving subsidies. A sectoral approach would be different in several ways. First, it would mean encouraging a more diverse set of sectors, compared with the near-exclusive focus in recent years on a handful of industries, notably securities. Second, it would involve identifying key infrastructure investments rather than subsidies to individual firms. Third, it would involve greater transparency and public accountability in economic development spending. Finally, it would include strong, binding job-creation targets for subsidy recipients. Do you support a sectoral approach to economic development? _X_ Yes __ No In general, do you support reducing or eliminating subsidies to individual companies, and replacing them with investment in City infrastructure? _X_ Yes __ No Do you support strengthening Local Law 69, which governs public reporting on economic development spending, to increase public disclosure of subsidy amounts and outcomes? _X_ Yes |
