State Senate ordered to reveal guidelines for taxpayer-funded mailers

ALBANY — The New York State Senate has been ordered to reveal its published rules for taxpayer-funded mailers within a 30-day period, according to an Albany County Supreme Court decision.

The judge ruled last week in favor of Blake Morris, a lawyer and Senate candidate, who in February of last year was denied a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request seeking the Senate's mail guidelines, which determine how taxpayer-funded flyers, letters, and newsletters can be distributed, as well as how much money each member is allocated.

Currently, the rules are only "verbally" communicated to members and staff when they ask, according to Senate Majority spokesman Scott Reif.  Each Senator receives the equivalent of two district-wide mailers a year and a little bit extra for first class mail that allows them to respond to constituent requests, he said.

"Unlike most state agencies, every single dollar spent by the Senate - including legislative mail - is specifically lined out in expenditure reports made available to the public and the media every six months," said Reif in a statement.

Morris is challenging Brooklyn Sen. Simcha Felder, a Democrat who caucuses with the Republicans and holds the crucial 32nd vote in the Senate. He said the reports don't explain the significant disparities in mail spending between legislators.

"It's opaque. There is no rhyme or reason why some senators get more than other senators just by looking at the expenditure reports," said Morris, noting that he and his wife sometime receive double mailings from Felder. "As a citizen, you want to know how your government is spending the money."

In many cases, disparities in mail spending appear to fall along party lines. For example, during the same disclosure period, Republican Senator Phil Boyle, of Suffolk County, spent $119,122.60 on mail, while Senator Leroy Comry, D-Queens, spent around $20,000. The disclosure reports are also difficult to interpret because they cover the fiscal year, which runs April through September, while lawmakers serve, and presumably send mail, throughout the calendar year.

Given that each Senate district has roughly the same population, within a 10 percent margin, the analysis of how much was spent on direct mail should be straightforward, said New York Public Interest Group executive director Blair Horner.

"It's not that complicated; it's about mail," said Horner. "If they are gaming it to the advantage of one political party over another, then that's a problem, because that's not how these mailers are supposed to be used."

While the taxpayer-funded mailers cannot officially be used for political purposes, incumbent legislators like Felder -- who spent $67,177.50 on mail expenses between April 1, 2017 to September 30, 2017 -- use the funds to promote their office's activities which helps stave off challengers.

Mike Murphy, a spokesperson for the Senate Democrats, said the only reason Senate Republicans would obscure the formula for allocating mail resources, would be to benefit the majority conference.

"The Senate Republicans have turned the mail program into their own political mailing operation and they are terrified of being exposed. Let's be clear, this is taxpayer money and the taxpayers should know what policies are in place," said Murphy.

The Senate's secretary Francis W. Patience, the Senate officer charged with responding to FOIL requests, initially denied Morris' inquiry in February 2017 saying that the document in question was not subject to disclosure rules.  Unlike state agencies, the Legislature is largely exempt from FOIL, and the Senate has an interest in protecting that status.

Morris appealed the denial, citing Senate rules requiring all legislators to have equitable access to resources including "mail privileges subject to published guidelines," but was again denied. He then requested a judicial review of governmental action, which was adjudicated in Albany Supreme Court.

After reviewing the guidelines, the Court determined they "constitute instructions to staff that affect members of the public," which makes them subject to FOIL.