Press Room

Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams today joined the New York City Council Committee on Public Safety to call for an end to the NYPD's Criminal Group Database (CGD), also known as the gang database. In his remarks before the committee, the Public Advocate underscored the disproportionate impact of the database on Black and Hispanic youth, the lack of transparency around its criteria for inclusion, and the harm it causes to individuals and communities.

“It is unclear how or why an individual gets added to the CGD, and it is even less clear how someone can get themselves removed from it,” said Public Advocate Williams. “Wishing a gang member a happy birthday on social media, being outside late and wearing a certain color, and living in the same public housing complex as accused gang members are all potential reasons for a person to be added to the database.”

The database currently contains approximately 16,000 names, with 99 percent of individuals identified as Black or Hispanic and 98 percent as male. It includes minors as young as 13 years old. The Office of the Inspector General for the NYPD has reported that the department has violated its own database entry and renewal processes, failing to provide sufficient guidance for inclusion and review.

Today’s hearing included testimony on Intro 798, legislation sponsored by Council Member Althea Stevens and co-sponsored by the Public Advocate, which seeks to abolish the database, prohibit the establishment of a similar system, and ensure individuals are notified if they have been listed in the database. The bill would also provide a process for individuals to request and review records before the database is dismantled.

“Being labeled as a gang member by the police, wrongfully or otherwise, often results in increased police harassment, stops, and arrests. This interrupts schooling and employment, and can even result in incarceration. It is also a waste of police resources that could otherwise be used to respond to or solve crimes,” the Public Advocate continued.  “We should be focusing our resources on strengthening communities and supporting young people who are at risk for violence, many of whom have been victims of violence themselves. I agree; we should be using the time and money spent on criminalizing youth and young adults of color on investing in education, different violence models, employment programs, affordable housing, and health services.”

The Public Advocate reiterated that the issue is not necessarily police presence but rather the misuse of law enforcement resources and the failure to invest in community-driven solutions. He urged the Council and the administration to shift focus from punitive measures to meaningful investments in the well-being of vulnerable communities.

The Public Advocate’s full opening comments as delivered are below. He also questioned the administration’s representatives multiple times – see those discussions here.

STATEMENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE JUMAANE D. WILLIAMS TO THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY FEBRUARY 24, 2025 Thank you Mr. Chair, I appreciate it, and I also want to note, it is also before noon and I am present. Good morning,

My name is Jumaane D. Williams, and I am the Public Advocate for the City of New York. I would like to thank Chair Salaam and the members of the Committee on Public Safety for holding this important hearing.

Since 2013, the NYPD has maintained a database of what they characterize as intelligence regarding criminal groups and street gangs. This Criminal Group Database (CGD)—or, as it is colloquially called, the “gang database”—according to the NYPD, contains about 16,000 entries and allows them to discern trends, relationships and patterns to enhance public safety and criminal investigations. However, advocates, lawyers, and individuals in the database themselves report that it is largely full of men and boys of more color, many of whom have no gang affiliation at all. 

It is unclear how or why an individual gets added to the CGD, and it is even less clear how someone can get themselves removed from it. Wishing a gang member a happy birthday on social media, being outside late and wearing a certain color, and living in the same public housing complex as accused gang members are all potential reasons for a person to be added to the database. In the last few years, the NYPD has expanded “self-admission” criteria to include social media postings—which can include emojis or hashtags, or other unclear and undisclosed criteria. This raises questions not only about the interpretation of these posts as admittance of gang membership, but also of whether the NYPD can definitively attribute a post to an individual. I think anyone who uses social media can relate to posting something without thinking or something that was misconstrued—it does not mean that they are admitting to being in a gang.

A report from the OIG-NYPD found that 99 percent of those in the CGD are Black or Hispanic, 98 percent male, and contains kids as young as 13 years old. These demographics are reminiscent of the abuses of stop, question and frisk; in 2023, 59 percent of Terry stops were of Black people, and 30 percent were Hispanic. In a city that is 36 percent white, this looks like a disproportionate targeting of certain communities. 

Being labeled as a gang member by the police, wrongfully or otherwise, often results in increased police harassment, stops, and arrests. This interrupts schooling and employment, and can even result in incarceration. It is also a waste of police resources that could otherwise be used to respond to or solve crimes. Individuals labeled as gang members face obstacles in court, as prosecutors can raise alleged “dangerousness” when judges set bail, and claiming gang affiliation can easily color a jury’s perception of a defendant. It is a damaging allegation that is almost impossible for someone to refute. Contact with the criminal legal system can cost a NYCHA resident their housing, which is especially troubling given gang takeovers  appear to target public housing and the surrounding communities. And while we don’t know if gang takedowns in NYC have led to deportations, the gang label presents serious and unique legal problems for noncitizens. With President Trump in office and Mayor Adams collaborating with immigration enforcement at the behest of the administration, it is especially urgent to ensure that we are not mislabeling people as gang members.

Today, we are hearing some bills including Intro 798, sponsored by Councilmember Stevens and of which I am a co-sponsor, which would abolish the Criminal Group Database and would prohibit a similar database from being established. It would also require notification to those in the database, as well as instruction for how they could request records contained in the database before it is destroyed. It is important to abolish the CGD for a number of reasons, including the fact that the NYPD has violated its database entry and renewal processes, including renewing inclusion of minors in the database without qualifying police contact, and it does not provide sufficient guidance for gang database entry and lacks enforcement in its review processes. The NYPD has also historically been resistant to these types of changes. 

We should instead try to focus our resources on strengthening communities and supporting young people who are at risk for violence, many of whom have been victims of violence themselves. At a hearing of this committee this past December, former Chief of Department Maddrey acknowledged that the NYPD has an increased presence in under-resourced communities, and that he wishes the city would bring more resources to those neighborhoods. 

I agree; we should be using the time and money spent on criminalizing youth and young adults of color on investing in education, different violence models, employment programs, affordable housing, and health services. We know what works to prevent crime and violence. We also know that simply trying to arrest the children of the people arrested twenty years ago will not get there. I just want to also be clear: the issue for me is not necessarily police involvement. It is the consistent over-policing. Some of the takedowns that are happening, we have to come back several years later to do the same takedowns, because we haven't done any changes in those communities.

Oftentimes I see in the news, these type of bills that are problems and they present violence from gangs themselves, even those these bills, so what it looks like some of the things we are doing aren’t working generationally, and it doesn't seem like a database like this stops the violence that we want to stop, but can cause additional harm to people who are not part of the legal system, that now may fall into further more problems in the legal system, because they were put there in the first place. So that is the issue that we are trying to fix. 

I don’t want the media to think that people up here are trying to promote violence, want violence in their communities, quite the opposite, we want it to stop. We also, in my opinion, want to stop asking the police to do everything and try to solve everything. It’s unfair to them and it’s unfair to the communities that they’re asked to solve these problems in. 

"The mayor’s notion that I and many others did not criticize the Biden administration or petition for funding and policy change in response to the surge of migrants is not only verifiably false, it’s absurd. We were in the streets, and we were in DC – just not for the Trump inauguration.”

"Unlike this mayor, none of us have pledged not to criticize the president, or ordered agencies to do the same. Also unlike him, we chose not to pit longtime New Yorkers with little against new arrivals with less, after first inviting the early waves of buses. If he is intentionally misleading the public in his own defense, that is deeply troubling, but does track with past governing choices. 

"I understand that the mayor is in crisis, and I try to remain focused on the work amid the noise. At the same time, my priority at this moment is providing New Yorkers with stability and the truth – unfortunately, at present, the mayor is providing New Yorkers with neither."

"The Trump administration’s slashing of Temporary Protected Status for Haitians is about doing as much harm as possible, as quickly as possible, for anyone they can marginalize and erase. 

"My office worked with the previous administration to secure extended protections for Haiti and a number of other countries where there is immediate danger for residents, and this cruel reversal is disastrous, if expected. Alarmingly, I’m sure there will be more. The federal government seems dedicated to making as many Black and Brown people as possible eligible for deportation, regardless of status, by revoking legal protections.

"The truth is that Donald Trump is trying to make our own country one where immigrants, Black and Brown communities, LGBTQ communities, and all marginalized groups are in immediate danger. 

"In the face of the threat he poses, I draw inspiration from the Haitian motto of ‘L'union fait la force.’ In unity, there is strength. Today, we must stand united with our Haitian family, as we did yesterday with Venezuelans and will tomorrow with another group, building a coalition of compassion to protect one another from the worst harm that Donald Trump, his allies, and his enablers, aim to inflict."  

"The urgency of this mayor-made crisis mandates everyone with tools at their disposal – the governor, other elected leaders, voters – use them to meet this moment. My office is reviewing the details, feasibility, and potential impact of this announcement.

"Proposing laws to constrain a specific person underscores the harm of having that person in office as mayor. Before attempting to create new structures and precedents, though, I hope the governor will fully consider all current contingencies, including the upcoming decision from Judge Ho. And I hope that the mayor will fully consider the damage to New York that he would cause through a reduction in the city’s autonomy, as he contemplates his own future.

"No one can deny the need for action at this point, and the fact that the governor feels the need to step in once again speaks to the gravity of the moment and the validity of concerns about this mayor. Any initiatives undertaken to correct the mayoral crisis of leadership must balance the need to protect the city in this moment, without creating unintended harm beyond it."

"The Trump administration is attempting to undo a program that was approved, implemented, and by all early results, is working to benefit our city. That’s not how laws work, and I want New Yorkers to know that as of now, the system is still in place.

"This amateurish attempt to defund our city’s public transit, pollute our air, and stall our progress must be clearly condemned and combated by all responsible leaders. Unfortunately, Mayor Adams is preoccupied this afternoon, put in the undeniably untenable position of fighting more to save himself than our city."

Date: 2/13/2025

To: NYC Commissioners and Agency Heads

From: New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams 

Subject: Serving the City in the Mayor's Absence

When the mayor’s office is vacant, it is my responsibility as Public Advocate to temporarily step in. The charter is less clear when a mayor has seemed to abandoned much of his duty, but not his position – so it’s up to each of you, to all of us, to steward the city in that absence.

Given the directive for the mayor’s case being dropped without prejudice, he is entirely beholden to the favor of the president and his agenda. But the city simply cannot be.

It is even more important now that we don’t stand down, but stand up, stand behind the New Yorkers we serve. These are tough times, and I know you are in very difficult positions. Yet the past consequences of the mayor's dereliction of duty should help us see the need to carry on the good work of governing for the people, not the person. I and many others are there to support you in service on behalf of the public.

I know that there are many initiatives and ideologies at play in agencies across the city that we may disagree on – we did last week, and we will tomorrow. But right now, it is incumbent on all of us to show that even with a mayor unable to impartially lead in this moment, city services will continue and we will keep working to meet the needs of all New Yorkers – including our newest residents and those who have long been struggling.

In service,

Jumaane D. Williams

Public Advocate for the City of New York