How De Blasio And Cuomo’s Feud Is Hurting NYC

NEW YORK CITY — As scandals envelop Gov. Andrew Cuomo, his longtime rival Mayor Bill de Blasio has become increasingly vocal about criticizing the governor’s supposed “bullying” and who ultimately suffers: everyday New Yorkers.

“I can’t tell you how many times I have had the experience in Albany of the governor believing he could take things from New York City because he thought he could get away with it politically,” de Blasio said Friday on WNYC’s “Brian Lehrer Show.”

Whether or not de Blasio is right, there’s no question New York City itself has long been stuck in the middle of a feud between the mayor and governor.

Their stances are clear — both de Blasio and Cuomo believe the other constantly oversteps their bounds. Over the years, a familiar pattern of de Blasio announcing a position only to have Cuomo swat it down has played out time and time again.

Cuomo’s office didn’t respond to a Patch request for comment on de Blasio’s assertion the governor has hurt the city. De Blasio, for his part, told Lehrer that if Cuomo’s scandals continue he doesn’t see how Cuomo “goes on.”

And de Blasio didn’t seem to be sweating a potential Cuomo-sized power vacuum.

“I’m quite certain we will all move forward together, even if he does have to step aside,” he said.

For years, the feud arguably could be brushed off as a petty squabble between politicians with outsize egos. But the coronavirus pandemic raised the stakes, making it a potential life and death affair for New York City.

Here’s a sampling of instances where New Yorkers, scared and struggling within the pandemic, got caught between de Blasio and Cuomo.

‘Shelter-in-place’ vs. ‘PAUSE’

Both de Blasio and Cuomo were slow to endorse a lockdown as the coronavirus first hit New York City in March 2020.

But de Blasio got there first — on March 17 told New Yorkers to prepare for an imminent “shelter-in-place” decision.

Cuomo’s office quickly swatted down de Blasio’s statement. Such a decision could only come from the governor and it wasn’t being considered, officials said.

Then Cuomo, on March 20, announced the state would go on “PAUSE” — a stay-at-home order he pointedly contrasted with de Blasio’s “shelter-in-place” proposal.

"Words matter," Cuomo said at the time. "The quote-unquote policy was never shelter-in-place."

But ultimately the difference between a shelter-in-place and PAUSE was minuscule-to-nonexistent — both closed or would have closed all but essential businesses and limited outdoor movements.

What wasn’t semantic was the harm from the delay — a study later found if lockdown orders had been instituted earlier, 17,000 lives could have been saved in New York City, Politico and other outlets reported.

Hotspot ZIP Codes versus ‘Zones’

The spring lockdown measures helped bring down New York City’s coronavirus levels to national lows over the summer.

Things changed starting in September as de Blasio started to warn of worrisome “hotspots” in ZIP Codes scattered across Brooklyn and Queens.

Eventually, the rising cases prompted de Blasio to call a surprise news conference proposing closures of non-essential businesses and schools. Cuomo, apparently caught by surprise, said that decision was his alone to make.

And so, for days, residents, business owners and parents in the hotspot neighborhoods waited for clarity. Public Advocate Jumaane Williams at the time saw echoes of the spring.

"The back and forth between the Mayor and Governor on the scope and method of enforcement for additional restrictions in specific zip codes as COVID-19 cases rise is an echo of what we saw in mid-March, when delays and power plays led to lives lost," he wrote in a statement.

"Since then, the only thing that has been consistent between them is inconsistency. The message has been mixed, and the results are clear - cases are rising and New York is at risk of another wide-scale outbreak if proper precautions are not taken."

When Cuomo came out with a local lockdown plan, he didn’t reference the hotspot ZIP Codes that de Blasio had primed New Yorkers to track. Instead, he outlined a new set of color-coded “zones” that he first unveiled with broadly-drawn maps that left many New Yorkers confused as to whether they would have to deal with restrictions.

The state eventually released more detailed maps that covered most, but not all, of de Blasio’s hotspot ZIP Codes.

School closures: A tale of two 3 percents

Back in the fall, the city’s public school students, parents and teachers were caught in a will-they-or-won’t-they waiting game over whether in-person learning would halt.

The city’s coronavirus level kept inching toward a 3 percent positivity level — an automatic trigger for closing schools.

But the matter was made unnecessarily confusing by the fact that de Blasio’s city health department and Cuomo’s state health department use — and continue to use — different ways to measure coronavirus positivity. Without getting into the mathematical weeds, the city’s method of measuring COVID-19 positivity consistently shows a higher percentage than the state’s.

So when the city’s rate crept toward 3 percent and the state’s lagged behind, New Yorkers were left unclear as to when schools would close.

The answer finally came when Cuomo gave a testy news conference in November. He berated reporters who echoed New Yorkers’ confusion before finally clarifying the city government's numbers dictate the public school closures while the state's measurement — which last tallied the rate at 2.5 percent in New York City — will decide the wider "orange zone" restrictions.

"On schools their numbers govern, because they have the ability to set their number," he said.

Schools closed to Cuomo’s apparent displeasure and rare inability to trump de Blasio’s authority.

Local ‘control’

Cuomo’s pandemic emergency powers have given him even greater authority over New York City.

Restrictions on indoor dining, business closures and more ultimately lie with Cuomo rather than de Blasio.

And while de Blasio often agreed with Cuomo’s decisions, he has increasingly chafed over the governor’s ability to set guidelines on coronavirus vaccinations.

De Blasio has pushed for more local “freedom to vaccinate” a broader swath of New Yorkers, including by using reserved second doses of the two-shot Pfizer and Moderna vaccines as first doses.

Cuomo on the other hand has been reluctant to open up vaccinations for fear of dwindling supply and infections overwhelming hospitals. He limited vaccine eligibility for weeks to health care workers and nursing home residents.

That changed in February when the CDC changed its guidance to open up vaccines to people with underlying health condition. Cuomo did the same, but was apparently reluctant — his initial announcement was so muddled that reporters had to get him to clarify.

De Blasio said he wants great local “control” over vaccinations as vaccine supply grows under President Joe Biden. He said Cuomo simply didn’t give the city the freedom to vaccinate.

“He literally stopped us from vaccinating senior citizens and first responders and teachers,” he said. “That wasn't good government, that wasn't helpful.”