Robert Bookman Testimony: NYC Hospitality Alliance

Also have been a partner in a boutique law firm called Pazetski and Bookman.

We specialize in licensing and regulatory matters.

But I've been involved with every aspect of the changing rules and regulations and the laws on sidewalk cafes for 40 years from both inside government and on the other side of government.

And we were deeply involved with two mayoral administrations and the city council in negotiating both this new statute and the rules with the Department of Transportation.

As with any once in a generational piece of legislation, there were many, many compromises that were made.

Some we supported, some we did not.

For the most part, we hoped for the best, and we believed that the council and administration did as well.

We understood that we would give these series of compromises, all of us, our best chance of success.

We would see what resulted, and we would come back.

And here we are.

Unfortunately, we now know that no one who supports outdoor dining can say that this program has been a success.

I say that without any malice, without pointing any fingers at anyone.

There are no bad guys here, there are no enemies.

The program simply has not worked out as well as we all had hoped for.

There were mistakes in the legislation that were part of compromises that DOT had to live with.

There were mistakes in their rulemaking that were part of compromises that the industries had to live with.

So there are a series of issues which have brought us where we are today.

I also want to point out specifically Pinkus Ringel, who is not here unfortunately, nor the commissioner.

I'm surprised neither one are here.

Both of them have been extremely cooperative working with us.

Ringle is uh one of the best public servants I've ever seen, quite frankly.

He responds to emails on weekends in the middle of the night.

They're very responsive.

But nevertheless, we have a structure that is not successful.

We need to recognize that it's not a success, despite everyone's best interest efforts, and look at the reasons why to and come up with solutions together.

The shockingly no number of restaurants that even bothered to apply for outdoor dining, let alone hundreds of those who applied but are not following through on their applications, and Max will talk a little bit about that, makes it clear that the program needs to be fixed.

Obviously, we all knew with the emergency over and the program no longer free that there would be a drop-off in the number of restaurants participating.

That's clear.

I'm a straight shooter, I have a reputation testifying here for 40 years.

Uh, you know, I'm not gonna blow smoke, I'll tell you the truth and I'll answer your questions truthfully.

But frankly, we thought there would be a lot more than the 3,000 establishments that applied.

We thought about double that number.

So the alliance asked our membership why so many did not apply, and the answers were clear in our survey.

The new stricter clearance requirements, as compared to the old law that nobody anticipated, which came out in the rules, made it more difficult for people to get sidewalk cafes.

The overall expense in relationship to those lower number of tables made some people decide it wasn't worth it.

The seasonal nature of roadway has really made it many people decide that it's not worth it, and that program has been decimated based on the number of applications that are filed.

And again, you will hear that there are potentially hundreds of people who did a file who are not following through now that they see how expensive it is to set it up.

The difficulty of many small businesses applying online added to the confusion and the expense that restaurants simply could not afford.

The consent, one of the compromises that was in the legislation was that sidewalk cafes would continue with the consent process in addition to a license.

Let me explain that for a minute.

There were two major structural problems that were brought into sidewalk cafes in the 1980s that caused so few licenses, and 70% centered in Manhattan.

And that was the zoning laws, which restricted it in out of boroughs, and the consent.

The consent makes it a long process, a complicated process, an expensive process.

It adds rent above a license fee.

We wanted to get rid of both.

Only zoning was eliminated.

Same thing like when we got rid of uh the Cabaret licensing law.

We said that's not going to make dancing legal because the zoning law is what restricts dancing.

And finally, years later, zoning was addressed.

So we had both of those problems here.

Many commercial users of the public sidewalks don't have both of those.

They just have a license.

Thousands of street vendors just have a license.

Fruit and vegetable stands, which are very much like sidewalk cafes, movable structures, they just have a license.

They just have a license.

None of them have this consent on top of it.

By keeping the consent on top of it, we created an expensive, complicated problem for the thousands of people that only experience outdoor dining during during the emergency, which was a simple go online, say yes to a few questions, and you got your permit.

Requiring the act.

So look let me give a few examples though, in some of the what Andrew talked about.

Processing time.

As a matter of policy.

The statute says that DOT must within five days of receiving an application determine if it is complete, and if it is complete, they're supposed to start the time clock by sending it to the community board and the other agencies that review sidewalk cafes.

Same language that existed when it was with the consumer affairs for 40 years.

DOT unfortunately interpreted that to mean not just that the application is complete, meaning all the documents are there, the photographs, the filing fee, but that it's an approvable application, meaning their entire review has to be done before they started the clock.

Well, that's a multi-month process, as it should be.

They have experts, examiners who review the plans, look at the pictures, get back to the applicant, which Max will talk about.

They're very responsive.

We respond to those, make some changes, uh, listen to the community board.

When once the application was deemed complete and approved by them, then they first started the clock.

And that's why we're in a situation where this late in the process from August 3rd, when the applications were filed, where we just don't have many approved.

Another couple of quick ones.

The online only, which has been discussed, has hurt a lot of small restaurants, immigrant restaurants, English is not their first language.

They couldn't know how they don't know how to upload and download, and they couldn't save their work.

Um, and now what we're seeing is a third rookie mistake is they're requiring, unlike consumer affairs, the entire annual rent up front.

Nobody pays an annual rent up front.

If you had to do that at home or in your business, you wouldn't have a business.

Consumer affairs always allowed quarterly payments.

There's nothing in the statute which prohibits that.

So the variety of issues that you know need to be addressed.

Uh, we can address it, but we all have to first come to the conclusion that what we have is not working, that we can correct these problems.

They're all correctable.

Some changes will can be accomplished with a simple policy shift, some with rule changes, some with statutory changes.

We all have a role here.

But this is a program that can be corrected.

Finally, the whole process here was to create a balance between the old law, which was way too restrictive, and the emergency law, which was way too permissive because it was an emergency.

We were trying to come to a balance.

We now see, unfortunately, we did not reach the correct balance, and we need to readdress these issues so we can come to a middle ground.

Many changes were positive.

No outdoor music, no outdoor TVs, the flooring on roadways have to be movable and cleaning, hours of operation that are restricted.

We addressed many of the problems, but we did not address what we see here, which is why businesses aren't applying.

And we thank you for the opportunity to set the table here.

And you'll briefly hear from Max and some of the restaurants that are having these issues.

Thank you.

Thank you, members.

My name is Max Bookman.

I'm a seventh-generation New York City resident chairman, and for the last 10 years, I've lived in your district.