“I work on a lot of the same issues,” said Ms. Pinsky, who married Economic Development Corporation head Seth Pinsky last summer. “The thing about the real estate industry, it’s very civic minded. Many owners are family businesses and there’s this strong tradition in the industry of wanting projects and policies that are best not just for the industry’s own interests, but for the entire city.

Angela Pinsky. (Photo by Kiki Conway)

Landlords know that their success and the health of their investments depend on the health of the city as a whole.”

Ms. Pinsky joined the mayor’s office during the heady first years of the Bloomberg administration, a period of sweeping vision, and bore witness firsthand to how real estate could provide government with the levers for urban change.

Starting as then-Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff’s chief of staff, one of the first projects she worked on was the rezoning of the Williamsburg and Greenpoint neighborhoods in Brooklyn, a process that would eventually allow a wave of residential development to sprout in the area. The neighborhood’s potential wasn’t as easy to see then. Ms. Pinsky lived in Williamsburg at the time, near the waterfront, an area that was a forlorn stretch of derelict-looking industrial buildings.

“If you didn’t get dinner by 6:00 you weren’t going to eat that night,” Ms. Pinsky said. “It’s hard to believe looking at the neighborhood today, but there weren’t grocery stores or restaurants back then.”

The area was already gaining momentum as a place for artists and hipsters and for its proximity to Manhattan. The rezoning, though, kicked that transformation into high gear and made the neighborhood the magnet for living, culture and nightlife that it is today. The project was just one of many seeds of revitalization that the administration sought to plant around the city, a bold agenda that galvanized Mrs. Pinsky’s view of real estate as a tonic that could cure the city’s ills.

“I worked on the Olympic bid and PlaNYC,” Ms. Pinsky said. “There was the feeling that you were never doing enough.”

Mayor Bloomberg arranged the office in City Hall as a large bullpen with everyone sitting at open workstations. His was, and still is, at the center of the room. Ms. Pinsky sat near the periphery, but the layout avoided isolation and permitted everyone in the room to feel within the fold of the office’s work.

“You could hear what the mayor was talking about on the phone and you always had an awareness of what was going on,” Ms. Pinsky said. “There were no silos. That was one of the great things about the administration—it was transparent.”

She remembers Mayor Bloomberg as having a photographic memory and a talent with data. “Numbers are part of his body,” Ms. Pinsky said. “But he was also very instinctual. The mayor would do the research and then trust his gut.”

Mr. Doctoroff, who left city government in 2007 to become the chief executive of Mayor Bloomberg’s financial information company, Bloomberg LP, was more analytical. “Dan wanted analyses down to the penny and he would ask you little details to see if you knew about a project inside and out,” Ms. Pinsky said.

Ms. Pinsky grew close with Mr. Doctoroff. She said he still checks in on her. “I had a very strong attachment to Dan,” Ms. Pinsky said. “I was young and had a lot to learn. I was timid. Working in that situation makes you learn about decision-making. I grew up a lot in that role. Dan still calls all of us. He’s very protective.”

Mrs. Pinsky stayed on when Mr. Doctoroff left, maintaining her position as a chief staffer for Bob Lieber, a former Lehman Brothers executive who was hired as Mr. Doctoroff’s successor in the role of deputy mayor of economic development. Mr. Lieber was less of a visionary than Mr. Doctoroff, according to Ms. Pinsky, but had a clear talent for negotiating deals, skills that Ms. Pinsky would also soon come to appreciate.

One of the first issues they handled together was what to do with Off Track Betting. The parlors were oozing red ink, Ms. Pinsky said, largely because the city and state took money out of its total revenue rather than its profits. “OTB expenses were rising and there was nothing to compensate it for that,” Ms. Pinsky said.

Mr. Lieber helped devise a solution in which the city and state would share a cut of OTB’s profits only, an approach that would pad its bottom line. He worked hard to align various interests in the state that would permit the idea to be implemented. But the negotiations bogged down and eventually he retreated, arranging a deal that would allow the state to take control of the organization. A year later, it was shuttered.

Mr. Lieber’s efforts had paid off in one sense; the city was no longer on the hook for OTB’s $500 million of pension and other liabilities. Still, it was demoralizing to see how such a common-sense solution could meet defeat when OTB’s inevitable demise had been so widely predicted.

By the spring of 2010, with the economy and government-spurred developed in slow gear due to the recession, Ms. Pinsky was ready for change. Mr. Lieber had left office to return to the private sector, taking a job at C3 Capital Partners. She soon got her own chance to switch over as well. “Mike Slattery, an executive at REBNY, called me in,” Ms. Pinsky said. “I wasn’t expecting it but they had an opening.”

For REBNY, Ms. Pinsky was a hugely attractive hire, as she had not only valuable connections in city government, but also a close feel for how it works. Having staff with Ms. Pinsky’s skill set and experience has been essential for the city’s real estate industry, whose health depends not just on economic winds but as much on the burdens and restrictions that government places on it too.

In recent months Ms. Pinsky has been working on a range of issues. Taxes on carried interest, an investment structure typically employed by hedge funds but also by some real estate partnerships, will likely be raised from the current capital gains rate. Ms. Pinsky and other lobbyists hope to segregate real estate from the issue, which has been focused at increasing taxes specifically for investment funds.

The outcome of their efforts could have a profound effect on how ownership structures are arranged in the real estate business. Closer to home, the City Council is grappling with whether to pass living-wage legislation, a regulation hotly opposed by the city’s real estate industry. The requirement primarily affects retail tenants, forcing them to pay higher wages to employees in buildings that receive city subsidies or incentives.

The issue is what brought down a bid by the Related Companies to redevelop the Kingsbridge Armory in 2009, when Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz backed instituting requirements that would have forced Related’s tenants in the project to pay the higher wage rate.

“Related couldn’t build under that requirement,” Ms. Pinsky said. “Retailers aren’t going to go to a building if they can get space across the street that’s cheaper. And developers know that and they’re not going to build if they can’t be as competitive.”

Ms. Pinsky, née Sung, got married to Seth Pinsky last summer. At least on the surface, the marriage seems like a well-suited match. Mr. Pinsky is the head of the city’s Economic Development Corporation, the pseudo government agency that the mayor’s office uses as one of its primary arms of economic development. Mrs. Pinsky said that she and her husband are actually quite different. “It really was a case of opposites attracting,” Mrs. Pinsky said. “I like dance music, he listens to nothing but classical. I’m very social and he tends to be more introverted.”

While Mrs. Pinsky would have preferred a getaway like Hawaii for their honeymoon, Mr. Pinsky chose the Sudan and then Egypt. Mr. Pinsky prefers exotic, out-of-the-way destinations that sometimes verge on risky. He was days away from visiting North Korea before the government there canceled his papers permitting entry. He went to Iran earlier in their relationship without Mrs. Pinsky.

“We had a safe word,” Mrs. Pinsky remembers. “Waffles. If he got captured and said that, I knew to send the U.S. government.”

The travel, especially in former Soviet countries, an area that fascinates Mr. Pinsky, has afforded her a perspective on infrastructure here.

“You can compare what they have in other cities and see where it has gone right and wrong and, also, what we do that is right and wrong,” Mrs. Pinsky said. “I still want to go to Hawaii.”

DGeiger@Observer.com

"Governor Andrew Cuomo has threatened the New York State Legislature that if we do not pass a law to redefine marriage to include homosexual marriage, he will take it to the people," Diaz writes.  "I challenge Governor Andrew Cuomo to do that.  He should bring it to the people!"

Diaz notes that all five states that have put the issue on the ballot have seen the voters reject same-sex marriage.

"In every single state where the people have had the opportunity to decide if they want to change the definition of marriage from a man and a woman, they have all voted against it.

The few states that have legalized homosexual marriage have done so because it has been imposed on them by the courts or by the legislature."

While this is true, it does seem likely that a marriage bill would pass in New York. LGBT advocates remain a potent organizing force here, while religious conservatives do not.

Bronx Democratic State Senator Ruben Diaz released today the content of a Freedom of Information Law request for information regarding the salary, benefits and other compensation that Cathie Black received during her time as chancellor of the New York City public schools, including any benefits or compensation she is slated to receive now that her tenure as abruptly ended.

Writes the Rev:

Records Access Officer
NYC Department of Education
52 Chambers Street, Room 308
New York, New York 10007

To Whom It May Concern:

This letter is a FOIL request for any and all information regarding the entire salary, benefits, and other compensation that New York City Schools Chancellor Cathie Black has received or will receive, including any severance or retirement benefits.

Should there be any portion of this request that is denied, please state the reasons for denying my request.  A prompt response to my request is mandated by statute.

Respectfully,

Senator Reverend Ruben Diaz
900 Rogers Place
Bronx, New York 10459
(718) 991-3161

Needless to say, the Bloomberg administration is anxious to move on from the Cathie Black fiasco, and surely don't appreciate pols who continue to wish to hang it around their necks. To wit, her replacement, Dennis Walcott, began the day making his promised waffles for a group of Brooklyn school children.

First he took his colleagues to task for giving Governor Andrew Cuomo all the authority to close prisons--an issue which is more of a concern for upstate Republicans--and then, the self-described "black guy with the kinky hair from Puerto Rico" asked what the use of having a legislature is, if they are just going to trust the governor to do the right thing.

"Shame, shame shame," he said. "Do you people understand what you are saying. We have an on-time budget, but do whatever you want governor, but we have an all-time budget."

Then Diaz all but accuses the Senate of being subsumed to Cuomo's presidential aspirations.

"Trust Governor Cuomo? He wants to be president. Governor Cuomo wants to be president, and he would do anything to be president. He would take away the Medicare from the people, he would take the services from the poor, he would take the money from education...he would put everybody on the unemployment line and then he would say, 'I balanced the budget. Elect me for President.'"

This doesn't sound much like a winning platform to us, but see for yourself:

Both sides claimed victory when Justice Thomas McNamara dismissed a suit filed last week by the Democrats, a suit which would have declared Malcolm Smith (still!) the majority leader and president pro tempore in the Senate. Democrats said they would not appeal the ruling, and once again reiterated their desire to work out some sort of power-sharing agreement. Once again, the Republicans demurred, claimed the 32-30 vote taken last week was valid and held a "session" without enough members to pass any legislation. Once again, David Paterson tried to offer a middle way, and it was rebuffed.

As the day's activity wound down, I found an unlikely voice of reason in State Senator Ruben Diaz Sr., a Bronx Democrat: "This mess is worse than ever."

As we spoke, and Diaz proclaimed that he was "just a soldier, not a general in this fight," deputy Democratic leader Jeff Klein walked out of a conference room still controlled by the Democrats and into an elevator. I asked him why no appeal was being filed.

"There was a victory—what it did was the judge says that is what we have been saying all along: that in order to continue government, we need to work it out," Klein said. "And the way we work it out, when its temporarily tied, 31-31, is by forming a temporary coalition."

This is not, in fact, what the Democrats have been saying all along. Immediately after the coup, they initiated the court action to overturn the coup, which they called "illegal."

But no matter.

A few minutes before I spoke to Klein, I stood in the chamber for another "session" convened by Republicans. They called a quorum, which failed, with only 30 Republicans plus defector-Democrat Pedro Espada Jr. answering "present." Then Republican Leader Dean Skelos read from the list of bills that would have been acted on in the chamber, and said Democrats were abdicating their responsibilities as senators for not showing up.

Espada Jr. went a step further, telling me and other reporters afterward that he would seek legal action against them. Earlier, he called on David Paterson to force them into the chamber.

"We would just ask them to please come to work," Espada Jr. He said he was open to talking about legislation, but not about leadership. "We feel that there is a fiduciary responsibility. As senators, we cannot be in violation of the State Constitution."

Espada Jr. was asked if this meant some kind of action would be appropriate to "compel" the Democrats to come to session.

"That's the thrust of it, obviously," Espada Jr. said. "When senators are saying, unilaterally, we will not forfeit our responsibilities that we're getting paid for, then something needs to kick in. What I'm hoping will kick in is a self-acknowledgement by them that they need to be here as part of their jobs, and the self-acknowledgement is that most of the bills that are under consideration are theirs."

He was asked if that meant they would escorted by police, or have their pay docked.

"I think, let's wait and see. I am reaching out to Senator Sampson."

State Senator Craig Johnson, a Democrat from Long Island who is an attorney, offered this response when I told him what Espada Jr. had said.

"I didn't know that Senator Espada became an attorney overnight," Johnson said. "I don't know who Senator Espada is to present himself as an authority on the New York State Constitution."

UPDATE: At a press conference late in the afternoon, David Paterson reiterated his call that all senators return to the chamber to settle the leadership matter, but emphasized: "I'm not telling anyone what to do here."

"You've got to put the issues of the people first, and that's what they need to do right now. And I'm not going to impede on that branch of government, and my not impeding on it isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign of strength to understand that I'm following the law," he said, pounding the podium. "I'm not doing it to sell anything, I'm doing it because that's my sworn duty."

Diaz will fill out the remainder of the term of his predecessor, Adolfo Carrion, and then almost surely run for re-election (and almost surely win if he does) this November. The race was, at one point, going to be competitive, before Diaz's major opponents decided not to enter the race.

Diaz is turning 36 this Sunday, and already has a decade of experience in Albany. And the borough presidency, barring disaster, will give him a useful springboard.

Hank Sheinkopf, a Democratic consultant who has worked with Diaz, said, “He is young, he is bright, he is a hard worker and he comes from a county where change is the fact of life at the moment.”

When asked if he could be a citywide candidate in four years, Sheinkopf said “Yeah.” A mayoral candidate, perhaps? “Absolutely.”

Diaz has strong support in the Bronx political establishment, which owes its existence--in its current form--to his family. (He and his father, the contrarian State Senator Ruben Diaz Sr., backed a coup that put Carl Heastie in power as the county Democratic Chair.)

The history of borough presidents running for higher office is well-established. David Dinkins of Manhattan was elected mayor. His successor, C. Virginia Fields, ran for the office, too. Scott Stringer, the current Manhattan borough president, is considering a run for U.S. Senate in 2010.

Fernando Ferrer, former borough president of the Bronx, ran for mayor three times. His successor at borough hall, Carrion, was running for city comptroller before he was offered a job as Barack Obama's director of Urban Affairs.

“The framework I see is that the Senate has really eliminated what my choice would be, which would be to have the tolls,” said Governor David Paterson, referring to a plan to raise money by tolling East River crossings in Manhattan. “If that’s the case, then we’re going to have to try to find alternative ways to come up with several hundred million dollars that would replace what would have been the revenues generated by the tolls.”

“I don’t think I have a choice,” said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. “This is not a unicameral legislature. We put out a plan, it’s apparent to me that it will not pass muster in the Senate.”

The ostensible third member of Albany’s ruling triumvirate, the Senate majority leader, Malcolm Smith—whose inability to move recalcitrant members of his own conference led to the current paralysis—said his staffers were considering a “menu” of things to replace the revenue from the tolls that are no longer a possibility.

I asked Mr. Paterson how long it might take to reach an agreement.

“Until you have an agreement, you really don’t know how long it’s going to take,” he said.

Theoretically, a deal to rescue the Metropolitan Transportation Association may be announced at any moment, although at press time, the members of the Senate Democratic conference hadn’t been briefed on the specifics of any agreement.

Meanwhile, though, it’s been a week and counting since the March 25 deadline came and went and the M.T.A. approved its raft of “doomsday” measures—dramatic service cutbacks and fare hikes scheduled to take effect a little over a month from now—to cover its debt.

One might reasonably think that the pressure on Albany, and on the Democratic-controlled Senate in particular, would be tremendous. Editorial boards have chastised the Senate for its inaction—Mr. Smith presented a plan a week before the M.T.A. deadline, but it was roundly panned as insufficient—and the mayor of New York has incited constituents, more or less, to riot against the legislators holding things up.

But if the criticism is having any effect, it’s hard to tell.

“We’re getting there, I can’t measure how close,” State Senator Bill Perkins, whose district contains thousands of transit users and who is chairman of the Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions, told The Observer on March 30.

Mr. Perkins, as it happens, was working on a proposal to avoid the politically controversial tolls, replacing them with some combination of a gas tax, increased vehicle registration fees and fees for parking.

It’s meant as an alternative plan that falls within the framework for proposals drawn up by the respected former M.T.A. chairman Richard Ravitch. The Ravitch revenue package, developed at the behest of the governor, was derived from a combination of bridge tolls for East and Harlem River spans, a regional payroll tax, a regional bus authority and a smaller fare increase. It was backed by unions and business groups, transit advocates and the authority itself. Public support was mobilized. Mr. Perkins—and many of his colleagues—lined up behind it. The Assembly, remarkably, agreed to a version of it that both Mr. Paterson and Mr. Ravitch approved of.

Then the Senate murdered it.

“The political circumstances are very simple: We have 32 members,” Mr. Perkins said, referring to the Democratic majority in the 62-member Senate. “O.K.? You know better than us what that means in terms of how to move forward. So, clearly, we have to be creative in terms of building the kind of consensus that can best represent a solution.”

What Mr. Perkins meant was that on any issue before state government—from the loftily progressive to, in this case, the last resort—can be held up by just one defector. State Senator Malcolm Smith has served as the chamber’s majority leader for nearly three months now, but he ascended to the top spot there only after a prolonged leadership struggle in which four, then three, holdout senators kept him pinned firmly over a barrel. He emerged only after giving them broad concessions. For the M.T.A., they showed him the barrel again.

State Senator Carl Kruger, the chairman of the Finance Committee—and something of a ringleader of a nominally Democratic dissident group within the Senate that calls itself the “gang of three”—declared the bridge tolls a “tax on the outer boroughs” and a “backdoor to congestion pricing.” Soon, other senators decided they agreed. State Senator Pedro Espada Jr. joined in, then State Senator Ruben Diaz Sr. and State Senator Hiram Monserrate.

Two other senators—Kevin Parker and Ruth Hassell-Thompson—declared their hatred for tolls. Mr. Kruger’s staffers were closely involved in the formation of an alternative proposal. The governor attacked it. Assemblymen shook their heads.

“You’ve got a very fragile majority in the Senate, where every decision is a critical one. If two people have a difference of opinion, you have a crisis,” Assemblyman Adriano Espaillat said, with obvious restraint.

“At the end of the day, I think that my opposition to the tolls opened up a floodgate of issues and question marks surrounding the entire practices and operation of the M.T.A.,” Mr. Kruger said Monday. “When we ultimately come to a compromise, more of the attributes of that compromise will incorporate all of the issues that we’ve raised.”

Mr. Kruger was smiling on March 17 when the Senate came up with its original proposal. Unlike the plans of the governor or the Assembly, it contained no bridge tolls. It also didn’t provide funding for the M.T.A.’s capital plan, which details schedules and funding for maintenance and projects every five years.

“At this point, we think our plan is sound,” Mr. Smith said at the time.

Mr. Smith was immediately attacked by transit advocates and M.T.A. officials—all of whom were hoping for a more complete plan.

The people most eager to stick up for the plan were the perennial thorns in Mr. Smith’s side—the gang. (Mr. Espada said it was “a great day for Pedro Espada, the M.T.A. ridership and the State Senate.”)

When asked if he had in fact been rolled by his members, Mr. Smith said: “Quite frankly, I would hope my members are strong enough and will try to drive agendas. This is a Democratic conference; this is not a Malcolm conference.”

The abuse continued for several days, and Mr. Smith’s public appearances became less frequent.

So now, instead of tolls, there will be some other form of pain.

“We’re still open to ideas, do you have any?” Mr. Perkins said on March 30.

But Mr. Perkins didn’t believe anything would be enacted this week. Maybe next week. If not, then definitely after the week-long break on April 20. Or so.

Aaron Donovan, a spokesman for the M.T.A., said that the first service cuts will take effect on April 30. Monthly commuter rail passes for June, which will reflect higher rates, will go on sale May 1.

I asked Mr. Kruger, who still has a strong hand in the negotiations, if a deal was close.

“Close only counts in horseshoes,” he said.

The papers were brought by Elena Sassower, director of an organization called the Center for Judicial Accountability, which boasts on its web site of having sued the New York Times for the basis of its alleged "suppression of the documentary evidence that CJA had provided it of the corruption of judicial selection and discipline," among other things.

In her testimony, she called Lippman's appointment the "product of a corrupted merit selection process" and "unconstitutional."

"When the people of this state relinquish their right to elect judges of the Court of Appeals, because there was supposedly a better way, it's called merit selection, what they were not told was the legislature would encapsulate the process in secrecy," she said, almost shrieking. The faces of many state senators contorted in response to her testimony, and she was shunted aside after several minutes due to a five-minute time limit for testimony.

She was followed by William Galison, a member of the same group, who alleged "criminal acts" relating to protection of an attorney he says is falsely registered but was not disciplined by Lippman.

Lippman, for his part, sat with relative stoicism and whispered to Associate Judge Carmen Beauchamp-Ciparick.

The issue of diversity in candidates put forward by the Committee on Judicial Nomination was also rehashed by some of the people who provided testimony and by some state senators.

"There will come a time when we minority legislators stand up and say, 'No more, master!'" State Senator Ruben Diaz said.

Both of the key Democratic legislative leaders - Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Minority Leader Malcolm Smith - issued statements saying they supported Paterson's proposals, but the Senate may prove a stumbling block.

Majority Leader Dean Skelos said he would like to reserve action on cuts that extend into next year - Paterson is attempting not only to address a $1.5 billion deficit in this fiscal year but to get a head start on next year - until he sees a complete budget proposal. That is currently scheduled for December 16.

"We must avoid any job-killing taxes and fee increases, which the Governor is proposing," Skelos said. "We must not simply pass costs down to school districts and local governments, and force them to raise taxes."

Skelos has been on the record opposing cuts in education aid, which, at $800 million, represented the largest chunk of cuts Paterson proposed for this fiscal year. It makes sense; school districts will see their aid reduced according to a formula that disproportionately affects wealthier areas. Many of those are on Long Island, Skelos' back yard and home to a solid block of his members. The conference is convening here tonight.

Silver called Paterson's package "a bold plan" and vowed that "the Assembly will not shrink from tough choices and plans to confront New York's fiscal crisis head-on, based on the principle of shared sacrifice."

He has convened hearing starting Thursday by the Ways & Means Committee to prepare for a special session next week.

Malcolm Smith said Paterson took "the courageous first step of reducing spending" and vowed to work with him. His support was unqualified, if not unspecific. But he may have a harder time following through on it.

State Senator Ruben Diaz, an independent-acting Democrat from the Bronx who is part of the "gang of three" issued his own statement this morning expressing displeasure with the cuts. "This proposal by Governor David Paterson, includes cuts to programs and services for the elderly, cuts to our children's education, increases in college tuitions, cuts to health care services, hospital closings, cuts to Medicaid, cuts to programs and services for the disabled, cuts to mental health services, salary reductions to health care workers such as home-attendants, nurses and maintenance workers, among others," Diaz said. "We as Democrats have fought for these services for our communities, and that is why I can't, I shouldn't, and I will not give my vote to my Democratic colleagues in the State Senate to approve these cuts proposed by Governor Paterson which will directly affect the residents of my community."

The Working Families Party also came out against the cuts, saying it was time for the ‘Millionaires tax' rejected early this year but revived by social services groups.

"The Governor's plan asks school children, local property tax payers, students at SUNY and CUNY, the elderly and New Yorkers with disabilities to sacrifice. The only people exempt from the pain are wealthy New Yorkers and the Wall Street barons who got us into this in the first place. That's wrong," said WFP Executive Director Dan Levitan.

Their position is predictable, but the clout has shifted. Some Democratic insiders gave the WFP at least partial credit for helping them win a majority in the State Senate this election cycle, meaning they may be more difficult to ignore than in the past.

Couple that with Speaker Silver's stated amenability to the millionaire's tax, and it could be an unignorable option as Paterson seeks to implement his own plan.

"What's coming out of the meeting is that they have not committed," spokesman Juda Engelmayer said. He confirmed Senator-elect Hiram Monserrate did not attend the session. "I think Mr. Monserrate might have counted himself out of the group."

Engelmayer could not confirm another report that the group was calling for a statewide referendum on gay marriage.

Originally, four state senators - Carl Kruger of Brooklyn, Ruben Diaz Sr. and Pedro Espada Jr. of the Bronx and Monserrate of Queens - grouped before the general election, saying they were forming an independent caucus.

The day after polls closed and Democrats found themselves with a narrow chamber majority for the first time in 40 years, Smith proclaimed his security-but was only flanked by 26 members.

The caucus was reduced to a gang of three after Senator-elect Hiram Monserrate was reported to have cut a deal with Smith while in Puerto Rico at the "Somos El Futuro" conference. Senators Espada and Diaz were reported to say they would only support a Democrat as majority leader, but Espada reportedly met with Republican Majority Leader (until January) Dean Skelos as Smith was wooing Monserrate. Diaz then said he would vote for a Democrat, but not one who supports same-sex marriage. (Smith says he is laser-focused on the economy and that gay marriage isn't a priority, but he has expressed support for it in the past.)

But today's action means Smith still has not secured enough votes to become majority leader in January.