Push Bill Letting Assistant District Attorneys Live Outside the City; Queens DA: Manhattan Exemption Should Apply to All

By REUVEN BLAU

The State Senate is gearing up to pass a bill to relax residency requirements for all Assistant District Attorneys, which would allow them to live anywhere in the state.

RICHARD A. BROWN: Restriction 'outdated.'

The measure - introduced at the behest of Queens District Attorney Richard Brown - would place all prosecutors on the same footing as their colleagues in the Manhattan DA's Office, who have been permitted to reside outside the city since 1962.

'Law Discriminates'

"The present law is really quite outdated," Mr. Brown said during an April 18 phone interview. "It's discriminatory against the so-called outer boroughs."

The rule was changed for Manhattan prosecutors after a residency law for all city workers was repealed.

"All ADAs should be treated the same as an assistant in New York County," Mr. Brown asserted. "Why shouldn't we have the same ability to recruit and retain as Manhattan has?"

New prosecutors are required to commit for three years when joining the Queens DA's Office, Mr. Brown noted. During that time they often get married, begin families, and start to look for less-expensive places to settle down, he continued.

SERPHIN MALTESE: 'No favorite sons.'

"I have significant problems in terms of recruiting and retaining assistants," he said. "In this day and age, my people can do the job that they do even though they reside in Nassau, Suffolk, or up in Westchester counties."

'Don't Want to Lose Them'  

By all accounts, the prosecutorial positions are highly competitive. But Mr. Brown and the city's four other DAs are seeking to relax the residency rule to help them retain their staff beyond the minimum required period without having to grant them waivers.

"We have as many as 1,300 hundred people apply for what amounts to 35 seats," Mr. Brown remarked. "As a result, we are able to hire very bright people. These are people I don't want to lose."

The proposed legislation would cover roughly one-third of the 300 Queens prosecutors who already live in the suburbs, Mr. Brown said. He cited a State Attorney General's opinion that concluded that the head of a county or municipality has the power to make appropriate exemptions to the residency requirements for their workers.

While he has already waived the rule for many of his staff members, Mr. Brown said he was concerned that those exemptions would become an election issue, just as they did for Brooklyn DA Charles J. Hynes in 2005.

Unfair Politics?

"There is no need to have that argument being made at the time we are running, particularly because it cannot be made to the Manhattan DA's Office," Mr. Brown contended.

Mr. Hynes was questioned for taking a hard line on residency laws when he prosecuted political gadfly and longtime challenger John Kennedy O'Hara for voting in city elections using a voter registration address that was not where he actually resided.

Critics of Mr. Hynes noted that his top aide listed his parents' home in Long Island on his voter registration. But First Assistant District Attorney Dino Amoroso also resides in Nassau County, where he pays income taxes, and lists that home on his driver's license. He was investigated and cleared by the Queens DA's Office.

Mr. Hynes himself came under fire after a 2004 article in Harper's magazine alleged that he unlawfully listed his office address - the Municipal Building in downtown Brooklyn - as his primary residence on a voter registration card in 1996.

A spokesman for his office called that filing a gaffe, which he said happened after Mr. Hynes submitted a change-of-address form while moving from his Flatbush home to a co-op in Bay Ridge that he had not yet finished purchasing. During that time, his mail was forwarded to his office while he stayed at a co-op in Breezy Point, Queens, the spokesman claimed.

DAs Must Live in Borough

Mr. Brown pointed out that the proposed legislation would not change the residency requirement for DAs, who must live in their respective boroughs.

The city's various residency rules have long been a matter of contention, local historians have pointed out. The requirements have been tightened and eased multiple times over the past 75 years.

Most recently, a key provision in District Council 37's contract reached last July allowing its members to live in six nearby state counties outside New York City has been blocked by the City Council, which it contends is outside its jurisdiction.

The city's largest public-employee union has unsuccessfully argued that the change is necessary because the cost of real estate has made it practically impossible for its members to purchase houses in the five boroughs. Several key Council Members, however, do not wish to limit job opportunities for workers in their districts.

That concern does not appear to be a problem for the proposal for prosecutors, as several State Senators have reportedly voiced their support for the measure, which was first reported by the New York Law Journal.

Many of the city's lawmakers are backing the measure, according to Mr. Brown. That list includes the bill's sponsor Queens Sen. Serphin Maltese, and Brooklyn Sen. Martin Golden, both of whom are Republicans.

'Why Favor Manhattan?'

"In all fairness it's appropriate to pass legislation like this because there is absolutely no reason that Manhattan should be the favorite son," said Mr. Maltese, who formerly served as a prosecutor at the Queens DA's Office. "I think it's understood that we would want the best and the brightest."

Democratic Assemblyman Joseph Lentol, who chairs the Committee on Codes, also supports the bill, Mr. Brown said. Before taking office, Mr. Lentol served as a Kings County ADA.

Mr. Brown said that he has not yet discussed the bill with Governor Spitzer, but his prior work experience as the state's former Attorney General and an Assistant DA in Manhattan should give him a keen understanding of the issue. "On the merits, it's certainly the right thing to do," Mr. Brown said.