During a radio interview yesterday, Grisanti - a freshman from Buffalo whom Lady Gaga is targeting - said he'd support civil unions, but was uncomfortable with applying the term "marriage" to the relationship formed between same-sex couples.

GRISANTI: "I'm not saying I'm against same-sex civil unions, on those lines. I have a problem with the term marriage. and being raised in a Catholic environment, being raised in a situation where I was an alter boy - I don't want to see any sort of discriminatory type lawsuits then brought against the various churches. That if you call it same-sex marriage and it's not recognized by the various churches, I don't want to see lawsuits, then, commence for some sort of discrimination along those lines."

ARBETTER: "You would then say yes, and vote for a civil union?"

GRISANTI: "Civil unions and all the proponents that go along with that, I have no problem with. I have a problem with the term marriage itself. To me, marriage is between a man and a woman. It's been a term, a term of ours for years that has been around for thousands of years. It's like calling a cat, a dog. I don't think that that needs to be changed."

State Senator Tom Duane, a Democrat from Manhattan who is openly gay, called Grisanti's comments "sad and unfortunate" for comparing "my right to marry the person I love, with cats and dogs."

Democratic control of the State Senate failed to provide any of the radical changes to rent laws that activists had long fought for—and that were expected once Republicans were booted from the majority. Deadlock dominated; the housing committee chair led a short-lived coup; then status quo regained power, allowing the real estate industry to exhale.

Now, a new front is opening in an age-old fight.

With a budget past due and the Senate Democrats looking increasingly vulnerable to losing their 32-30 majority in November’s elections, the tenants are scrambling to get something—anything—passed, approaching the rent law changes with a new urgency.

Next week an array of tenant activist groups are planning to formally launch a campaign to push the Democratic conference—which has long said that tenant issues are at the top of its agenda—to pass major changes before the end of the legislative session in June, including abolishing the right of landlords to take empty apartments market rate.

The groups plan to target a few key senators who are currently blocking a vote on their issues, and plan extensive ground-level organizing (door-knocking, canvassing, phone calls) within their districts. New York Communities for Change, the successor to the now-defunct organizing powerhouse ACORN, plans to engage in the push, and the Working Families Party counts tenant rights as one of its top priorities after a budget is finished.

“Even if they’re back in power by one vote, we are finished,” Mike McKee, the director of Housing Here and Now and a longtime tenant advocate, said of the Republicans. “We’re going to do a very sustained job.”

But rent issues are a microcosm of the stalemate and infighting within the Senate, making it hard to see how the tenants could ever get their 32 votes needed by June for any significant legislation. Landlords, meanwhile, seem unconcerned. 

Vacancy decontrol—the provision by which landlords are allowed to convert rent-stabilized apartments into more lucrative market-rate units once a stabilized tenant moves out—is indeed the issue that ignites the most fervor. Tenant groups have pushed for years for a full repeal of the provision, calling for a dramatic change that would no longer allow stabilized apartments to go market rate and would re-regulate tens of thousands of apartments that have, particularly those in Manhattan.

To the real estate industry, this would be the ultimate affront, one they have poured millions of dollars in campaign contributions in recent years to prevent. The affected landlords—Glenwood Management owner Leonard Litwin is the most munificent on the political front—decry the repeal of decontrol as anarchic, saying it would bankrupt landlords across the city, send tax rolls plummeting and, ironically, provide low rents for the rich as well as the poor.

THE LIBERAL MEMBERS of the Democratic majority in the Senate feel they need to demonstrate some action on their core issues before the election.

State Senator Tom Duane said that rent regulation is at the top of the agenda of the progressive caucus he leads. “One of the premiere issues of the progressive caucus is a reinstatement of the rent regulation that has been lost in the years,” he said. 

But the Democrats’ Senate—characterized by an array of competing factions and personalities, with each individual member having the power to hold up any legislation—has difficulty agreeing on anything controversial, and the Manhattan Democrats often have lost out to members such as Majority Leader Pedro Espada of the Bronx, who has been more willing to go against the grain of the conference.
For his part, Mr. Espada, who is also the chairman of the housing committee, took it upon himself to dismiss the progressives’ push for a repeal of vacancy decontrol, offering a window into some of the tensions.

“I am speaking for the entire Democratic majority leadership team—Senators Sampson, Smith and Klein—when I say that none of us think this is a good time to push the repeal of vacancy decontrol,” he said in a statement, citing a drop in tax revenues that would come from the law.

But a spokesman for Mr. Sampson did not comment specifically on whether this was his position, and State Senator Liz Krueger, who is allied with tenant advocates, said this was untrue. “I have confirmed with the actual leader, Senator Sampson, that that is not the position of the leadership team,” she said.

Leaders within the real estate industry see this discord—and support from Mr. Espada—and seem confident that they can ward off any attempts at changing rent laws, at least for this year.

The industry’s biggest weapon: campaign contributions.

“As we all know the most difficult thing is to raise money,” said Joe Strasburg, president of the Rent Stabilization Association, offering a subtle threat for Democrats who support pro-tenant legislation. “And guess what? There would be people who would be very upset and get involved in races they might otherwise stay out of.”

ebrown@observer.com

Despite the spin, most everyone pushing for a bill legalizing same-sex marriage privately acknowledges that the 24-38 loss in the State Senate was a whopper, and while theories abound, there's no clear explaination for how the bill was so soundly defeated.

Senator Eric Schneiderman started by blaming Republicans.

"If you look at the Assembly, there were lots of Republican yeses," the liberal Manhattan Democrat said. "I don't believe it. They clearly decided not to allow a vote of conscience. I know that there were Republicans that wanted to vote yes."

That's hardly fair, considering eight Democrats voted against the measure. Democrats—under the leadership of Malcolm Smith—took the chamber's majority in 2008 after promising advocates that they would pass the marriage bill, and that they would pick candidates who would vote in favor. That did not happen; Joe Addabbo, a senator from southeast Queens, was elected over Serphin Maltese.

"If there wasn't a vote today, I wouldn't know in a street fight Joe Addabbo doesn't have my back," said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda.

Van Capelle's organization had pushed extremely hard for a vote. In recent weeks, according to a Democratic senator familiar with the lobbying effort, they were the driving force. Someone like Senator Tom Duane, the only openly gay member of the chamber and the bill's prime sponsor, became an accessory.

Duane certainly looked the part by the end of Tuesday. He closed the debate on the bill with a meandering 21-minute ramble that was the furthest thing from cogent. (You could argue this was a filibuster to give time to corral votes.) It included comprehensive thanks for every member and staffer, referenced Harriet Tubman ("she would be bringing people north. There were no street lights. They were in darkness"), his time volunteering as a teacher, his advanced age ("you know, I'm getting to be an older gay. I've got a new gay hip") and a joke about why the measure was urgent.

"We are beating New Jersey. Today. They may have the Jets, they may have the Giants. They are not taking this away. We are beating them," Duane said.

I asked Van Capelle if he thought Duane, conspicuously omitted from his organization's press release, was strong enough of an advocate on the issue.

"I'm enormously proud of the—what's it called—the fact that the Senate brought this bill to the floor for a debate today," he replied, prompting me to repeat my question. "I'm proud of the senators who stood up for our community today."

Duane's colleagues defended him publicly and privately, but acknowledge that he and Van Capelle are not close.

"I don't think they like each other. But that's just their relationship," said one Senate Democrat. "You know, Tom has a different style. Tom believes in killing things with kindness; Alan is aggressive. It can work: a yin and a yang, a good cop and a bad cop."

But the friction wasn't fatal, explained another Senate Democrat familiar with the lobbying: "They were always making efforts to coordinate, but I think the personal stuff was problematic. That could explain a few votes of a swing, but with this big a margin, there were other votes."

Both Senators Carl Kruger and Hiram Monserrate voted against the measure, which appears the result of a chit cashed by Senator Ruben Diaz Sr., a consistently outspoken opponent of the bill and member of the "four amigos" faction.

("If you look at my district, the communities that I represent, I'm a mosaic of ultra-Orthodox Jews, Christians, Muslims, a large Russian conservative population. There were letters and hundreds of phone calls, and the overwhelming sentiment was to oppose a same-sex marriage bill," Kruger told me after the vote. Another hole in this theory: The fourth amigo, Pedro Espada Jr., voted in favor. Of Diaz, Kruger said, "Did he ask me how I was going to vote? For sure. Did I answer? Absolutely … there's never a payback, just an open dialogue.")

There's also the radioactivity of David Paterson. He has pushed hard for a vote on the bill starting in March, hoping to increase his political standing, but according to numerous senators did not work to lobby or corral. His relationship with members on both sides of the aisle has systematically devolved.

"Nobody wants to do anything for this governor," said one Senate Democrat, on background. Members—including Duane—were surprised when he showed up on the floor after the vote.

Duane swayed side to side as the governor decried "political intimidation." He was asked what the new strategy is, in light of the defeat.

"The strategy is to win," he replied.

"I'm angry, I'm disappointed, I'm sad, I'm let down, I'm betrayed, but I am not going away," Duane said. "It makes me angry, but it doesn't in any way make me or anyone in the LGBT community feel the need to back down, because people have been, uh, uh, betrayed. People have been made angry many, many times over the years."

It was a "set back" caused by a "contagious lack of backbone," Duane said in the back of the chamber. He had believed some Republicans would vote yes. He didn't say who. As he spoke, David Paterson sidled up to him. Even when he was made aware of the governor's presence, Duane continued to talk for another few minutes as Paterson slid behind him.

"I was surprised that the margin was that great--but it's the reason that we have votes in a democracy," Paterson said. "Now we know where the areas are to improve, and now we know what we have to do to win. So if you take a step back, as sad as the day is--it's as sad a day as I've had since I joined public service--if you take a step back...have you ever seen much attention paid to a vote in a legislative body?"

"It makes me think, though, of the darkest day of the Civil Rights movement in 1867, when the Supreme Court voted, seven to two, against Dred Scott and legalized slavery north of the 36^th Parallel. That was the darkest day in the abolitionist movement. But in all the years that have passed since, we never noticed it was only six years before the emancipation proclamation. Because after that vote, the advocates knew what they had to do."

"I think we have to make the climate safer for people who were sitting in this chamber who believe in gay marriage but didn't have the intestinal fortitude to vote for it."

Alan Van Capelle, the executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda who pushed hard for this vote, said it was not a defeat.

"It's a defeat today, but it's not a defeat for marriage equality," he said. "We had some of the most extraordinary speeches delivered on the floor of the Senate that I've ever seen delivered in all my time up in Albany. We had people share stories about their families, about their loss, that I don't think we've heard before, and I think we've seen what we asked for happen."

"We know have a road map for 2010 and the work we have to do," he said.

Senator Tom Duane, the chamber's only openly gay member and the bill's sponsor, spoke very briefly explaining the measure.

"This legislation would merely provide me and tens of thousands of other new Yorkers with equal rights," he said. "It would make me equal in every way to everyone else in this chamber."

The floor was then given to Senator Ruben Diaz Sr., an outspoken critic of the bill and same-sex marriage. He made four basic arguments: that many religions institutions do not support this measure; that advocates of the measure spent a lot of money to flip the majority; that people do not support the measure, it has lost in popular referendums and only been approved through judicial action; and that he was betrayed by Malcolm Smith, the chamber's majority leader.

His tone was subdued (by his own colorful standard) and serious. He spoke from prepared remarks. He offered none of his trademark theatrics. Before the vote, he sat alone in his chair, stewing intensely. Last night, the reverend said he was praying.

"I implore you, ladies and gentlemen, members of this body. Members of the Republican Party: Remember your roots. Remember your values--remember you stand for traditional values, family values, moral values," Diaz said. "Join me, a Democrat, join me, a Hispanic, join me a Puerto Rican, join me, a black, join me, a resident of the city of New York in saying no."

"My disappointment is not with the community, but with the leadership of this body. They have not been straight with me, they have not been straight with Tom Duane."

"This is the day that the Lord has made. This is the day that we have to decide to do something," Diaz concluded. "God bless all of you, and thank you."

"This is the first time the Senate leadership has indicated that it will support a vote on marriage equality," Paterson said. He also committed to putting the bill on the calendar for a special session next week.

Conspicuously absent from the Red Room press conference where Paterson spoke were any Senate leaders. Democratic Conference Leader John Sampson and Senate President Malcolm Smith had attended a meeting with David Paterson, to which they were led by an intense-looking Tom Duane, the openly gay senator who is the bill's sponsor. Plans to hold a vote on the marriage bill today fell through, and the expectation from sources lobbying for the bill was that a commitment would be made to vote on the bill during a special session next week. Their closed-door meeting lasted almost two hours; reporters staking it out were called into the Red Room, giving Smith and Sampson a chance to slip away.

I asked Paterson why the Senate leadership itself didn't make the commitment.

"I think that those three leaders would not like to get into a conversation about dates and times. They've made the commitment--they have not had a chance to meet with their membership just yet, and usually these type of commitments come after meeting with membership," he said, less than three hours after telling reporters that "I can't explain the dynamic of the Senate, because nobody can."

"Because people are leaving Albany today, we thought it was important to notify the public, and I think that they have representation in the meeting and they will stand behind this commitment," Paterson continued. He was joined at a podium by Senators Eric Adams, Jeff Klein, Eric Schneiderman and Duane.

"I want to applaud in the strongest possible way Governor Paterson's leadership on this issue and on so many issues that confront our state," Duane said. "But especially on this issue. It's just really great."

"I'm very happy with the outcome of our discussion, and as you know, if I'm not happy you know it," he continued. "And I'm very happy with the result of the meeting."

Alan Van Capelle, the executive of the Empire State Pride Agenda, who has been pushing hard for a vote on the bill even though the votes for its passage are far from secured, said the announcement was "significant."

Leaving the announcement, Senate Democratic spokesman Austin Shafran walked hurriedly with reporters in tow, and said "I can only confirm what the governor said."

"There is a commitment to bring the bill to the floor for a vote before the end of the year, and we will commit the full spectrum of our energies to making marriage equality a reality in the state of New York," Shafran said after checking with the leaders.

While again frustrated, advocates have accepted the situation and are looking forward to next week.

"It's the only game in town, so we've got to play it," one said.

State Senator Tom Duane, the measure's sponsor in that chamber, just walked across the back of the floor trailed by Democratic Conference Leader John Sampson and Eric Adams, his top lieutenant. Along with Senators Malcolm Smith, Eric Schneiderman and Deputy Majority Leader Jeff Klein, they walked down to meet with David Paterson. Duane's hands were clasped and he was pacing. A source familiar with the lobbying effort said that the conference was revisiting its decision.

None of the senators would comment.

A few minutes earlier, when he met with reporters to say a deficit reduction package won't be arrived upon until next week, David Paterson was asked for this thoughts on the non-passage of the bill during today's session, as we heard happened earlier.

"I don't know that that's true," Paterson said. "It's moot. Honestly, I don't know what the Senate is going to do with this. I implored them that I would rather see an up or down vote than no action at all. In my opinion, historically, I think we have lost touch with how movements for equality are reached. There are a lot of ups and downs."

He then noted that the Emancipation Proclamation was signed five years after the Dred Scott decision, which said slaves were to be treated as property under the law. "My view is that an up or down--a record on where the senators in this state stand--is more important."

Paterson's formal proclamation for the session is a political wish list: it also calls for the legislature to act on bills legalizing same-sex marriage, enacting a cheaper pension tier for new state workers, tougher penalties for those who drive drunk with children in their cars and public authority reform. He also wants a spending cap, something he first proposed in May. In doing this, Paterson is trying to get the bump from end-of-session of which he was deprived of when the State Senate went bonkers for a month. Or he can yell at legislators if they thwart him, something he's started doing already.

Paterson also sent a letter to the leadership of the Assembly asking to use the chamber to address a joint legislative session on Monday afternoon, an Assembly source confirmed. It's unclear if lawmakers will show up for that--they are legally required to show up for the special session on Tuesday, but as we remember from earlier this year, not act on anything. A senior Democratic official in the State Senate told the Associated Press that "we're not returning for a photo op" and Liz reports that some members will be in Puerto Rico.

State Senator Neil Breslin, an Albany County Democrat, said at a press conference Thursday afternoon that he has "every intention" of being there, and Austin Shafran, a conference spokesman says it will return "when there is an agreement."

"I have not heard that," Breslin said. "I know they had a conference call, I don't think there is any intention of boycotting the governor. I know that there are talks going on right now that hopefully will lead to a mutual resolution of a $3.1 billion deficit. I think that both houses are in basic agreement with a majority of the cuts put forth by the governor."

Assemblyman Jim Tedisco, a Republican, called Paterson's call "a taxpayer-funded game of finger pointing and attempts to shift the blame for current problems rather than trying to actually solve them" and costs $71,000 a day.

The inclusion of same-sex marriage legislation drew applause from gay rights advocates, who said they were "thrilled" with the inclusion.

"We look forward to hearing our lives and our families debated on the Senate floor next Tuesday," said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda. "It's now time that each of the 62 State Senators vote their conscience on this bill that has great implications for hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers in all parts of the state."

(An almost wrinkle: Senator Tom Duane, the bill's sponsor, is mourning the death of his mother Winifred, who passed away this morning at age 84. A funeral is planned for Saturday. The State Senate was unable to pass bills over the summer when State Senator Brian Foley had to miss session due to the death of his father, but Duane is expected to be in Albany on Tuesday.)

It's unclear if same-sex marriage has the votes to pass, or if it will be taken up. Bills passed in extraordinary session must pass both houses and be signed into law; a bill passed in extraordinary session cannot be paired with a bill passed during the regular session (as the Assembly did with same-sex marriage) and signed into law. Under Parliamentary procedure, each chamber of the legislature can gavel into special session fulfilling their legal requirement under the Constitution and then gavel into regular session, where they are not bound by the governor's agenda. I expect that's what will happen, so Paterson's proclamation doesn't mean action will be taken on these items.

In his press release, Paterson focused on the need to act urgently for the fiscal health of the state.

"New York can no longer afford delays, and New Yorkers will no longer stand for delays," he said. "I have met with my colleagues in government and I understand and agree with the need to lessen the impact that these reductions will have on all New Yorkers - but the surest way to mitigate the pain is to act now."

UPDATE: Paterson spokesman Morgan Hook sent over a statement saying the Democratic intractability is "appalling."

"As the Governor has said, the time for action to address New York's budget crisis is now," Hook said. "A photo-op is going to China for a trade mission while ignoring the widening state budget gap. Addressing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression is no photo-op, and hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who have lost their jobs or homes should be insulted by the insinuation. Governor Paterson is proposing measures to reign in decades of over spending and over taxing in Albany. Every member of the legislature needs to join him to do this. New Yorkers have waited too long for action on what everyone agrees are the most pressing issues facing the State. When New York runs out of money to pay it's bills, we'll see if this unnamed Senate 'official' want to snap photos next to our plunging bond rating."

In a letter to Fannie and Freddie, the electeds--U.S. Representative Carolyn Maloney, Councilman Dan Garodnick, State Senator Tom Duane, Borough President Scott Stringer and Assemblyman Brian Kavanagh--write:

When the federal government decided it needed to use taxpayer money to help restore solvency to Fannie and Freddie, it involved a massive restructuring. While a painful process, it was ultimately necessary to ensure that your companies would remain strong for future generations. Much in the same way, we need to ensure that ST/PCV will be in place for future generations of middle class New Yorkers.

Fannie and Freddie own part of the building's $3 billion mortgage, and some of its other debt. As of May, the two companies had received about $400 billion dollars in public funds.

Ken Raske, CEO of the Greater New York Hospital Association, sent this memo to hospital heads and lobbyists, naming Carl Kruger, John Sampson and Tom Duane as all being on record against cuts.

"It is extremely important that you continue to meet with your legislators, including your Assembly members," Raske writes. "Ask them to stand with Senators Sampson, Duane, and Kruger against the health care cuts. Ask them to immediately contact their legislative leaders to express opposition. If they say no, ask them 'Why Not? Particularly when these senators have done so?'"

In the past, GNYHA has run advertisements against Paterson along with SEIU 1199, the health care workers union. So far only NYSUT is on the air in this fight.

The memo is below.

Gnyha Memo