Staten Island Votes 2026: A Comprehensive, Nonpartisan Guide to Candidates, Incumbents, Public Records and Ballot Proposals

By the Staten Islander Editors & Staff Writers | Research cutoff: October 30, 2026 | General election: Tuesday, November 3, 2026

Editorial purpose. This guide examines the individuals seeking public office on Staten Island ballots, the documented work of incumbents, the commitments of challengers, the work of other officials representing the borough, and the laws and institutional relationships affecting voters. It does not endorse any candidate or political party. Its aim is to distinguish what is known, what is proposed, what is alleged, and what remains to be determined.

Staten Island is governed through overlapping systems. New York City’s administration controls many day-to-day local services, Albany governs state law and significant funding, Congress determines national law and federal appropriations, and courts interpret and apply the law. Elected officials may cooperate across political lines even while disagreeing about fundamental questions of taxation, criminal justice, development, energy, and personal liberty. Understanding the relationship between institutions often matters as much as understanding a campaign slogan.

For that reason, this article treats an introduced bill as an introduced bill—not an enacted law; a grant announcement as a funding announcement—not evidence that construction has finished; and a candidate’s characterization of an opponent as a claim—not an independent factual finding. Political affiliation is reported because it is relevant, but readers are not presumed to share any particular ideology. Sources are numbered throughout and collected at the end. [1][2]

At a glance: Who appears on the 2026 ballot?

The New York City Board of Elections and state election certifications identify the following Richmond County contests. A particular voter sees only those Senate, Assembly, and district-specific judicial races applicable to that voter’s address. The executive offices, state comptroller, state attorney general and U.S. House election are also included as applicable. New York’s election system allows one candidate to appear on multiple ballot lines; that does not necessarily mean there are separate candidacies. (Incumbents are listed first, where applicable.  Two judge races have an open seat)[1][2][57]

• Governor/Lieutenant Governor: Kathy Hochul and Adrienne Adams (Democratic/Working Families) versus Bruce Blakeman and Todd Hood (Republican/Conservative/Vote Affordable).
• State Comptroller: Thomas DiNapoli (Democratic/Working Families) versus Joseph Hernandez (Republican/Conservative).
• State Attorney General: Letitia James (Democratic/Working Families) versus Saritha Komatireddy (Republican/Conservative).
• U.S. House, District 11: Nicole Malliotakis (Republican/Conservative) versus Mike DeCillis (Democratic).
• State Senate, District 23: Jessica Scarcella-Spanton (Democratic/Affordable & Safe) versus Ruslan Shamal (Republican/Conservative).
• State Senate, District 24: Andrew Lanza (Republican/Conservative) versus Alexis Rodriguez (Democratic).
• Assembly, District 61: Charles Fall (Democratic) versus Casey Marie O’Connor-Manasia (Republican).
• Assembly, District 62: Michael Reilly Jr. (Republican/Conservative), without a listed opponent on the printed ballot.
• Assembly, District 63: Sam Pirozzolo (Republican/Conservative) versus Matthew Mobilia (Democratic).
• Assembly, District 64: Michael Tannousis (Republican/Conservative) versus Shpetim “Tim” Qorraj (Democratic).
• State Supreme Court, 13th Judicial District: Kelvin Richards (Democratic) versus Michael Pinto (Republican).
• Richmond County Civil Court, countywide: Tashanna Golden (Democratic) versus Glenn Yost (Republican).
• Civil Court, First Municipal Court District: John Vitucci (Democratic) versus Carrie Ann Low (Republican/Conservative).

Five proposed amendments to the New York City Charter also appear on the ballot. Their practical effects are examined below. [1][3]

Governor and Lieutenant Governor: The statewide executive

Kathy Hochul and Adrienne Adams — Democratic / Working Families

Incumbency and background. Hochul became governor in 2021 and is seeking another term. Adrienne Adams, formerly speaker of the New York City Council, is her running mate. In this office, the governor proposes budgets, signs or vetoes legislation, directs executive agencies, and makes appointments subject to applicable law.

Documented governmental action. Hochul’s administration and the Legislature enacted the fiscal 2027 budget in May 2026. Measures reported in the enacted budget include larger commitments to childcare and prekindergarten, energy rebates, public-safety spending, housing and construction reforms, and changes involving immigration enforcement and online protections. The administration reports a $4.5 billion statewide childcare and prekindergarten investment and describes a path toward universal provision; that is a multiyear commitment, not a claim that every family already has a seat. Previous tax-credit and school-meal changes also form part of her record. Budget implementation, program enrollment and realized savings warrant separate measurement. [4]

Stated approach. Hochul emphasizes direct assistance and state investment alongside regulation, arguing that government can reduce household costs while supporting public safety and social services. Her opponent disputes whether one-time checks and regulatory policies address the structural causes of high costs. The two debated public safety, immigration, taxation, utility bills and the economy on October 13. [5][60]

Adrienne Adams. Adams’s City Council record and former speakership are relevant because the lieutenant governor assists the governor and may succeed to the office. Her views have not always matched every detail of the governor’s policy; the joint ticket should not be understood as proof of identical positions on every question.

Bruce Blakeman and Todd Hood — Republican / Conservative / Vote Affordable

Background. Blakeman is Nassau County executive, previously serving in other local and regional public positions; Todd Hood is Madison County’s sheriff. The campaign foregrounds local executive administration and law enforcement. A New York Post profile published October 30 provides additional biographical reporting on Blakeman’s public career. [61]

Stated approach. Blakeman proposes exempting the first $50,000 of individual income and $100,000 of joint-filer income from New York state income tax, reducing utility bills, altering bail and criminal-justice policies and revising state energy policy. He argues for lower taxes and less state regulation. Hochul questions how his proposed cuts would be paid for and the practicality of his proposals. Blakeman’s campaign estimates and energy-cost promises are projections, not demonstrated future results. [5][6][7]

Policy disagreement, not an established forecast. Blakeman warns that Hochul would approve tax increases associated with New York City leadership; Hochul has said she would not raise state income taxes. The allegation and the denial should be attributed to their speakers; voters cannot know a future legislative decision solely from an advertisement. Their different approaches to energy extraction, congestion pricing and immigration enforcement also matter for Staten Islanders whose travel and utility costs are affected by multiple levels of government. [5][6]

State Comptroller: Who examines the money?

Thomas P. DiNapoli — Democratic / Working Families, incumbent

DiNapoli has served since 2007. The comptroller audits governmental bodies, exercises oversight of significant state financial functions, and manages the New York State Common Retirement Fund. In August, his office reported an estimated retirement-fund value of $309.7 billion as of June 30, 2026, and an estimated 6.12% investment return for the quarter; it also reported a 96.8% funded ratio at March 31. These numbers are dated financial measures, not guaranteed returns or proof that all programs are efficiently administered. [8]

DiNapoli presents sustained audits, professional fund management and fiscal transparency as his principal credentials. At the October 1 debate, he challenged suggestions that the office had not identified fraud or invested in New York companies, emphasizing existing work. [10][11]

Joseph Hernandez — Republican / Conservative, challenger

Hernandez comes from business, investment and entrepreneurial work. He proposes a dedicated fraud task force, pre-payment detection of suspect transactions, data analysis, stronger audits of the MTA, Medicaid and the consumer-directed personal assistance system, and a review of pension fees and investments. He also questions what he considers the incumbent’s approach to investment and fiscal oversight. These are prospective policies. [9]

Their debate raised fraud, pension investment philosophy, the role of artificial intelligence and questions concerning campaign contributions. An allegation about contributions or investment choices should not be equated with a finding of impropriety. An important practical question is which proposed controls are within the comptroller’s existing power and which would require other agencies or legislation. [10][11]

Attorney General: State litigation and legal enforcement

Letitia James — Democratic / Working Families, incumbent

James has led the attorney general’s office since 2019. Its responsibilities include civil enforcement, consumer protection, some fraud investigations, rights litigation, and representation of the state. Her office has pursued work involving corporate accountability, unlawful business practices, opioid-related actions and litigation with the federal government. The office’s own public case records are available for readers seeking underlying filings and outcomes. [14]

Advertisement

James advocates continuing consumer and civil-rights protection and defending New York laws. Her litigation involving Donald Trump has been politically contested, but legal filings, findings, appeals and public criticism occupy different evidentiary categories and must not be collapsed into one narrative.

Saritha Komatireddy — Republican / Conservative, challenger

Komatireddy previously worked as a federal prosecutor and in leadership at the Drug Enforcement Administration. She emphasizes serious criminal investigations, Medicaid fraud, public corruption, cybercrime and responses to severe mental illness and homelessness. Her proposals include stronger cooperation with district attorneys and legal interventions involving individuals in crisis. Whether a given intervention is lawful, clinically appropriate or administratively practical requires analysis of constitutional safeguards, medical capacity and existing statutes.

In an October 8 debate, Komatireddy argued that the office had become overly political; James defended its work and said legal investigations would proceed on evidence. The candidates also disagreed over federal-state legal conflicts. Their competing descriptions of each other’s motivations are campaign speech, not independently established findings. [12][13]

U.S. House of Representatives, 11th Congressional District

Nicole Malliotakis — Republican / Conservative, incumbent

Malliotakis has represented Staten Island and parts of southern Brooklyn since 2021. She serves on the House Ways and Means Committee, which gives her a role in federal tax and related legislation. Her priorities include tax relief, immigration enforcement, public safety, veterans, local infrastructure and energy costs. She points to constituent services and federal funding obtained for district projects as evidence of performance. Such project announcements should be checked against appropriations, grant agreements and completion records rather than automatically described as completed improvements. [19]

In a September NY1 interview, she described her campaign as being about constituent results and her own district record, while also discussing how her constituency views President Trump. She has supported major Republican federal tax-and-spending initiatives, making their effects on benefits, healthcare, taxes and federal deficits part of her record. [17][18]

Mike DeCillis — Democratic, challenger

DeCillis describes a career including work as a police officer, first responder, special-education teacher and attorney. He supports single-payer healthcare, greater federal education investment, worker and small-business assistance, higher corporate or wealthy-taxpayer contributions, climate and shoreline infrastructure measures, and expanded congressional oversight of the executive branch. He favors changes to firearms policy and broader reproductive-rights protections. [15]

DeCillis calls for abolishing ICE, while also acknowledging that immigration enforcement must address criminal conduct. That is his stated platform, distinct from the legal structure currently in effect. He advocates express buses, light rail and further work on transportation projects for Staten Island and southern Brooklyn. He discussed his candidacy with Errol Louis on NY1 on September 28. [15][16]

Choice of federal approach. The candidates agree that cost of living, transportation and safety affect the district. They diverge on federal taxation, healthcare structure, immigration enforcement, firearms restrictions and the use of federal power. In Congress, neither representative could independently enact the entirety of a platform; legislation, appropriations and administrative implementation involve other institutions. [15][17][18]

New York State Senate, District 23

Jessica Scarcella-Spanton — Democratic / Affordable & Safe, incumbent

Scarcella-Spanton has served since 2023, representing parts of Staten Island and southern Brooklyn, and chairs the Senate committee concerned with veterans, homeland security and military affairs. Her submitted NYC Votes profile identifies affordability, public safety and healthcare as her leading issues. She describes work on retail-worker protections, anti-squatting law, funding and support for veterans, access to reproductive healthcare, housing assistance and local schools. Some achievements were accomplished in the budget or with other lawmakers, so attribution must not imply sole authorship. [20][21]

Enacted laws, with bill numbers. She was the Senate sponsor of S5053B, modifying the mandatory retirement age for specified NYPD members, and S7808A, addressing salary-base calculation for members of the NYC police pension fund. Both passed both chambers and were signed September 28, 2026, as Chapters 311 and 312, respectively. Her participation is verifiable in the legislative record. [22][23]

She supports the CREEP Act as a co-sponsor, discussed separately below, and has introduced S8940 to expand distance restrictions for licensed cannabis premises near specified sensitive locations. As of the research cutoff, S8940 remained in Senate committee: it was not an enacted statewide rule. Her district work also includes preserving resident toll relief, and her published statements support insurance coverage and expanded maternal healthcare access. [20][21][44]

Ruslan Shamal — Republican / Conservative, challenger

Shamal is a Staten Island resident, small-business owner and former radio host who came to the United States from Belarus. He emphasizes personal enterprise, affordability, police support, property rights and opposition to certain higher-density housing and education policies. His campaign uses explicitly anti-socialist language; that ideological description is his own political framing rather than a neutral classification of an opponent’s entire program. [24][25]

In a detailed September interview with The Gazette New York, Shamal identified specific legislation he would back, including state-income-tax exemptions for tips and overtime, suspension of certain utility taxes and surcharges, and stronger consideration of dangerousness in pretrial release. He cited Lanza’s repeat-auto-theft proposal, S7241, and called for a higher senior-homeowner exemption. He also expressed concern about hospital funding, possible maternity-unit closures, specialized high school admissions and transportation. These are proposals he would support; their cited bill numbers do not establish that they have become law. [24][27]

The difference. Scarcella-Spanton presents a record of enacted measures and negotiated funding and generally operates within the Democratic Senate majority. Shamal proposes a Republican approach to taxation, criminal justice, zoning and the relationship between state authority and individual or local decision-making. Both emphasize safety and affordability, but offer distinct proposed mechanisms. [20][24][25]

New York State Senate, District 24

Andrew J. Lanza — Republican / Conservative, incumbent

Lanza has served in the State Senate since 2007 and is a deputy minority leader. Earlier public service included the City Council and work as an assistant district attorney. His legislative interests include criminal justice, public safety, taxes and tolls, Staten Island’s land use, transportation, veterans and institutional oversight. His official biography credits earlier work on the establishment of Staten Island’s separate 13th Judicial District, internet impersonation law and anti-trafficking legislation. Those historical actions should be considered separately from proposals in the current session. [26]

Current proposal, not enacted: S7241 would create an aggravated-grand-larceny offense for qualifying repeat automobile theft and alter bail and youth-court provisions. The Senate’s official record shows it remains in the Codes Committee as of October 30. Its legal consequences cannot properly be attributed to an enacted statute. [27]

Clove Lakes Park. Lanza joined Borough President Vito Fossella and Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo in calling for investigation of sewage contamination in the Clove Lakes system. A September 21 announcement followed dye-testing that identified contamination linked to Stone House plumbing; an October 15 interagency meeting identified additional city-facility and restroom sources. Officials sought a more complete plumbing remedy instead of isolated fixes. StatenIslander.org subsequently published a Parks Department response identifying further investigation and expected concessionaire remediation. These are documented advocacy and agency responses, not proof that the lakes were fully remediated. [29][30]

Alexis Rodriguez — Democratic, challenger

Rodriguez describes himself as a public-school teacher and union member raised in Midland Beach. His detailed campaign policy page proposes waiving mortgage recording tax for first-time homebuyers, beginning with certain essential workers; adjusting the mansion-tax threshold for inflation; protecting STAR relief; independently auditing utilities before rate increases; and requiring infrastructure before additional development. [28]

On transportation, he proposes a Staten Island voting seat on the MTA board, continued resident discounts, clearer Hylan Boulevard bus-lane rules, and exemptions from Manhattan congestion-pricing charges for certain city workers. He also proposes directing transportation investment toward express buses, a West Shore bus line and a South Shore fast ferry. These measures have different legal and financial pathways: a state Senate member can advocate and sponsor legislation but cannot alone command the MTA or municipal budget. [28]

The difference. Lanza offers a long legislative and constituent-service record and a Republican public-safety and tax-relief agenda. Rodriguez emphasizes a Democratic seat within the chamber majority, school and infrastructure spending, specific consumer costs and transportation governance. The claim that majority-party membership would increase a district’s bargaining power is a campaign argument, not a guarantee of an appropriation. [26][28]

State Assembly, District 61

Charles D. Fall — Democratic, incumbent

Fall represents a district including Staten Island’s North Shore and portions of Brooklyn and Manhattan. He serves as Assembly deputy majority leader. His government biography identifies education, housing, health coverage and transportation as priorities. [31]

His prime-sponsored legislative list includes A2099, seeking to exempt Staten Island residents from Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge tolls; A2144, seeking a congestion-pricing exemption for certain Staten Island and lower-Manhattan residents; A2091, a tenant-repair proposal; A2093, an auto-consumer transparency proposal; and A4029 on earlier colorectal screening coverage. A bill’s appearance in this list is evidence of sponsorship, not enactment; each legislative status must be read separately. [32]

Fall points to his position in the Assembly majority and his role in securing funding and advancing local projects. In the October 27 Face to Face interview, he highlighted funding associated with local healthcare and the North Shore transit proposal. Funding secured, project planning and completed service are different steps and must be evaluated as such. [33]

Casey Marie O’Connor-Manasia — Republican, challenger

O’Connor-Manasia is a small-business owner associated with Castleton Farm to Bagel. In the same candidate interview, she emphasized tax and regulatory burdens on neighborhood enterprises and argued for incentives to help them operate. She questioned loss of parking associated with proposed Richmond Terrace transit changes and favored reconsidering North Shore light rail. [33]

This race presents a contrast between an incumbent emphasizing access to the Assembly majority and capital resources, and a challenger centering small-business viability, parking and the design of public transit. A preference for one transit model does not itself prove the engineering or fiscal merits of that option; ridership estimates, right-of-way requirements, operating costs and effects on nearby businesses should be assessed. [31][32][33]

State Assembly, District 62

Michael W. Reilly Jr. — Republican / Conservative, incumbent; no printed-ballot challenger

Reilly has a law-enforcement background and focuses on education, public safety, taxation and transportation. His official Assembly page reports a 2026 proposal, A10825, to provide tax relief to New Yorkers who pay tolls while commuting to work. As introduced legislation, it is not an existing tax deduction unless and until enacted in its final form. [34]

He has advocated tighter criminal-justice rules and worked with other Staten Island Republicans on school-transportation concerns, including joint requests regarding student bus-service continuity. His absence of a printed-ballot opponent does not relieve voters of the opportunity to examine his record or write in a candidate as permitted by election rules. [34]

State Assembly, District 63

Editorial disclosure: Before his election, Sam Pirozzolo contributed to StatenIslander.org. This prior contributor relationship is disclosed here so that readers can evaluate our reporting with knowledge of the association. It provides no exemption from documentary verification or equal scrutiny of candidates. Content supplied by him or his office is identified as such.

Sam Pirozzolo — Republican / Conservative, incumbent

Pirozzolo took office in 2023. His legislation includes A139, proposing restrictions on the placement of battery energy storage facilities in the district; A277, addressing emergency planning for certain fixed storage facilities; A8141, providing elected-official notice of proposed battery systems; and other measures concerning electric vehicles, energy, pensions, fuel taxes and the possible incorporation of Staten Island as a separate city. The official Assembly list documents sponsorship, not passage of every measure. [35]

In February 2026 he advocated greater use of natural gas generation, lower utility costs, and reconsideration of some state climate mandates. These are his policy positions and proposed energy strategy; the effect of any proposed change would require further engineering, price and environmental analysis. [36]

Secession. In a January 2026 StatenIslander.org interview, Pirozzolo discussed Staten Island’s potential separation from New York City while remaining part of the state. The accompanying material reviews historical feasibility studies and unresolved questions involving infrastructure, debt, labor and revenue. The historical reports do not establish the precise fiscal result of a hypothetical separation under 2026 conditions; fresh fiscal modeling, democratic authorization and legislative action would be needed. [37]

Interagency and health advocacy. Pirozzolo participated with Fossella and Lanza in the Clove Lakes response. In February he also led a letter signed by the entire elected Staten Island delegation requesting renewal of city opioid-settlement grant funding. The published letter refers to $12 million previously obtained for borough services. It documents collective advocacy, not sole credit for the program or independent proof of every claimed outcome. [29][30][46]

Matthew Mobilia — Democratic, challenger

Mobilia’s campaign identifies public safety, small-business growth, community investment, infrastructure, education, civil and human rights, and cross-party cooperation as priorities. He advocates community policing, support and training for law enforcement, reductions in unnecessary small-business burdens, and strengthened public services. His published platform is more general than some opponents’ bill-specific programs. Readers should not infer an undisclosed position on cannabis, secession or a particular energy project simply from his party label. [38]

The candidates provide different degrees of policy specificity. Pirozzolo’s legislative record and stated opposition to particular regulations are readily identifiable; Mobilia articulates a broader program emphasizing community investment and cooperation. The level of public detail available should itself be apparent to voters, without becoming an unsupported judgment about either candidate’s intentions. [35][38]

State Assembly, District 64

Michael Tannousis — Republican / Conservative, incumbent

Tannousis, a former prosecutor, represents eastern Staten Island and part of Brooklyn. His legislative record includes A6358, proposing restoration of judicial discretion relating to bail; A6680, a multi-part approach to repealing congestion pricing and auditing the MTA; A6996, opposing battery-storage facilities in the district; and A11107, seeking greater cannabis-premises distances from schools, childcare and houses of worship. These are formally listed proposals; their status varies and they should not be grouped as enacted achievements. [39]

His official profile also emphasizes transportation costs, land use, public safety, the rights of crime victims and taxpayer burdens. Tannousis has worked with other Staten Island officials on school transportation and development concerns. [39]

Shpetim “Tim” Qorraj — Democratic, challenger

Qorraj is a business and real-estate professional active in community organizations. His campaign proposes protecting Staten Island’s Verrazzano toll discount, studying options to eliminate the toll, developing a Great Kills fast-ferry connection, improving express-bus service, and examining Hylan Boulevard congestion and bus-lane options. [40][41]

His healthcare proposals include improved hospital staffing, seeking a new city urgent-care facility on the East Shore, funding equipment and supporting electronic-record modernization. He supports added local police resources and technology and incentives to attract first responders. For schools, he emphasizes teacher retention and adequate public education resources. [40][41]

The difference. Tannousis emphasizes criminal-justice changes, toll objections, regulatory restraint and location restrictions on certain facilities. Qorraj emphasizes specific service investments, transit options, healthcare staffing and workforce development. Both express concern about travel costs and public safety, but the legislative and administrative methods they propose differ. [39][40]

The CREEP Act: A documented bipartisan action, and a pending legal question

The Ceasing Repeated and Extremely Egregious Predatory (CREEP) Behavior Act, S3394A/A3226A, seeks to create a civil process for obtaining anti-stalking orders in circumstances in which existing protective-order routes may not be available. This includes the difficulty a victim may face in seeking protection from a neighbor or another person outside a qualifying family or intimate relationship without an existing criminal case. The bill matters to constituents evaluating the accessibility of legal remedies and the due-process obligations accompanying them. [42][58]

Verified status: The Senate passed S3394A on February 11, 2026, by 59–0. The Assembly passed it June 4. The official record still labels the bill “Passed Senate & Assembly,” rather than “Signed by Governor,” as of October 30. Passage in both houses is a significant legislative event but is not equivalent to enactment. The bill’s principal Senate sponsor is Andrew Gounardes; Jessica Scarcella-Spanton appears among its Senate co-sponsors. The Senate’s February 11 roll call records both Staten Island senators—Democrat Jessica Scarcella-Spanton and Republican Andrew Lanza—voting Aye. Lanza also voted for the bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 4. These are verifiable examples of support across party lines, without suggesting the pending legislation has already become law. [42][58]

Policy rationale: The measure would create a judicial route for addressing repeated stalking and harassment without requiring every applicant to qualify under the existing family-offense framework. Supporters seek more timely intervention for conduct that can become dangerous before a criminal case is brought.

Local reporting and editorial perspective: In a May 7, 2026 article designated as editorial analysis, StatenIslander.org described what it called the “intimacy gap”—the difficulty of obtaining certain civil protection orders when a stalker is not a family member or qualifying intimate partner. It discussed the Samantha Stites stalking case to illustrate the consequences that supporters say earlier intervention might prevent. The article was written before the June Assembly vote. Its policy arguments and anticipated benefits represent an editorial assessment, not a court finding, independent demonstration of projected savings, or an update on enactment status. The Legislature’s bill record remains authoritative on what the proposal legally says and whether it is in effect. [62][42]

Legal concerns: The New York City Bar Association acknowledged the underlying problem but asked for changes involving counsel for respondents, a firmer deadline for hearings after temporary orders, safeguards for minors and people with disabilities, service on anonymous respondents, constitutional speech questions, and the possibility of improper use of the legal process. The association proposed amendments rather than simply denying the need for protection. A fair reading holds both the need for meaningful remedies and the need for procedural safeguards in view. [43]

Readers should think that the CREEP Act is “already law” based on passage alone. If enacted, its actual remedies will be determined by the final statutory text, implementing court procedures and subsequent interpretation.

Judicial elections: Qualifications, experience and independence

Three judicial contests appear on Richmond County’s official ballot: Kelvin Richards versus Michael J. Pinto for Supreme Court in the 13th Judicial District; Tashanna Golden versus Glenn A. Yost for countywide Civil Court; and John A. Vitucci versus Carrie Ann Low for Civil Court in the First Municipal Court District. New York’s Supreme Court is a trial-level court of broad jurisdiction, not the state’s highest court. Judges are responsible for applying law and maintaining procedural fairness rather than advancing party platforms. [1][49]

Richards and Pinto: Richards’s background includes public defense work. Pinto is an incumbent Civil Court judge seeking election to Supreme Court. They bring different combinations of courtroom advocacy and judicial experience. Golden and Yost: Golden is a Housing Court judge with a background in tenant representation and civil legal services. Yost is an attorney, former NYPD detective, and legal counsel to Senator Lanza; his professional experience includes family and criminal matters. Vitucci and Low: Vitucci’s work includes prosecution, litigation and judicial law-clerk experience. Low has served in prosecutorial and judicial law-clerk capacities. These are professional backgrounds, not predictions of how either candidate will rule. [49][50]

The New York City Bar Association rated all six Richmond County judicial candidates “Approved” in its October 2026 evaluation. The rating reports qualification for office; it is not a comparative endorsement. The bar release labels the Vitucci–Low contest differently from the ballot. The Board of Elections and an October 2 appellate ruling identify it as the First Municipal Court District, which is the designation this article follows. In that ruling, the court affirmed Vitucci’s placement on the ballot after a dispute over the nomination paperwork. [49][50]

Five city charter questions on the ballot

These are genuine decisions for voters even though they do not concern individual politicians. NYC Votes provides official language, explanatory context and recorded public arguments for and against the proposals. [3]

Proposal 1 — Use of public space

Would reduce mandatory hearings in the process for obtaining permission to use certain public spaces—for example, for ramps, planters and cafes—and remove the City Council’s ability to reject sidewalk-cafe revocable consents. It would retain some notifications and opportunities for comment. The tradeoff involves speed, access and the loss of certain formal review procedures. [3]

Proposal 2 — City contracting

Would enable simplified contractor questionnaires, adjust some hearing and approval requirements and require regular Procurement Policy Board meetings. The underlying questions concern administrative burden, public access to contracting, and the continuing ability to detect problems before public funds are committed. [3]

Proposal 3 — Streets and city property

Would speed review of specified street-safety projects, the disposition of certain city-owned property and office-space acquisitions. Certain matters could move forward without existing City Council review or hearings. Effects on neighborhood participation and speed of action must both be examined. [3]

Proposal 4 — Construction and waterfront permits

Would create a centralized construction permitting process, permit additional Department of Buildings officials to grant approvals and transfer certain waterfront permitting responsibilities from Small Business Services. The proposal has particular relevance to an island with major coastal and marine infrastructure. [3]

Proposal 5 — Financial reserves

Would set a target of maintaining reserves equivalent to 12% of the prior year’s tax revenue, together with a method for calculating contributions. It would not require immediate deposits sufficient to hit the target; deposits remain part of budget decisions. Published arguments include support for clearer fiscal planning and criticism that the target can be circumvented or satisfied through reserves not fully available for emergencies. [3][59]

The elected officials Staten Islanders vote for who are not seeking reelection in this election

Vito Fossella, borough president (Republican). Fossella advocates for local capital spending, parks, land-use issues and transportation improvements. His 2026 participation in the Clove Lakes investigation is documented in borough statements and in StatenIslander.org’s reporting of the agency response. A borough president can convene, recommend, advocate and allocate certain capital resources but does not run every city agency involved. [29][30]

Michael E. McMahon, Richmond County district attorney (Democratic). McMahon leads the borough’s local prosecutorial office. District-attorney priorities intersect with state criminal law, NYPD investigations, victim services and court capacity, while prosecutorial decisions remain constrained by evidence and law. An indictment must not be described as a conviction.

Kamillah Hanks, Council District 49 (Democratic). Hanks serves the North Shore and became Council Majority Whip in 2026. Her published biography identifies substantial funding commitments for schools, healthcare, parks and waterfront development. As with all capital allocations, the claimed funding should be distinguished from the completion of projects. [51][52]

David Carr, Council District 50 (Republican). Carr serves part of Staten Island and Brooklyn and is Council minority leader. His record emphasizes property taxation, veterans, public safety, infrastructure and municipal oversight. His office offers a legislative history to compare with stated priorities. [51][53]

Frank Morano, Council District 51 (Republican). Morano entered the Council in 2025 and chairs its veterans committee. His work includes public-safety, transportation, small-business and government-transparency concerns. A shorter tenure necessarily yields a shorter legislative record; proposed introductions must be tracked through passage and enactment. [51][54]

Citywide officials: Mayor Zohran Mamdani, City Comptroller Mark Levine and Public Advocate Jumaane Williams hold offices that affect Staten Island but are not on the 2026 general-election ballot. Their roles differ: the mayor directs the executive branch of city government; the comptroller audits and reports on city finances and pension responsibilities; the public advocate investigates constituent and systemic complaints and can propose legislation.

United States senators: Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand represent all New Yorkers in the U.S. Senate, including Staten Island, but their staggered terms do not place them on this year’s ballot. Federal legislation and appropriations affecting the borough therefore involve more than its one U.S. House member.

For current City Council officeholders and districts, the Council’s directory is preferable to older neighborhood-office lists, which sometimes preserve outdated names after elections. [51]

An example of cross-party governance: Opioid-settlement funding

In February 2026, StatenIslander.org published a joint request by all members of Staten Island’s elected delegation asking Mayor Mamdani to renew funding for addiction-treatment and support services. Signatories included officeholders affiliated with both major parties: Malliotakis, Scarcella-Spanton, Lanza, Fall, Reilly, Pirozzolo, Tannousis, Fossella, McMahon, Hanks, Carr and Morano. Their letter refers to $12 million in earlier funding secured over four years and requests continuity of services. [46]

The document establishes that those individuals made a joint appeal; it does not independently measure overdose deaths prevented by each funded program. The situation shows that cooperation can be specific and verifiable without implying that participants agree on other matters such as cannabis, bail or energy policy.

Campaign finance and outside organizations

Campaign committees and independent-expenditure organizations are separate entities with different reporting obligations. City & State reported that several committees spent money supporting 2026 New York candidates, including Scarcella-Spanton and Hochul, and described funding associated with charter-school advocacy, sports betting and other industries. Those reports warrant public attention, especially when the industries are subject to state decisions. [47]

Money spent on an independent expenditure is not the same thing as a direct campaign contribution, and support from an organization does not by itself establish a legislative favor or improper arrangement. Readers who wish to assess the relationship should examine original campaign-finance filings, donor identities, dates, lobbying disclosures, the candidate’s documented votes and relevant regulations. City & State also explains several additional ballot lines—including Scarcella-Spanton’s “Affordable & Safe”—whose names should not be mistaken for separate offices or candidates. [47][48]

What evidence can and cannot tell voters

A reliable election guide cannot convert every statement into a fact merely by attaching a citation. An incumbent’s official website is a primary source for what the office says it has done; it may not be the strongest independent source for whether those actions produced measurable benefits. A campaign website is a primary source for promises, not proof of their affordability or expected results. A newspaper interview establishes that words were spoken in a particular context, not necessarily that the candidate’s numerical or causal claims have been verified. A bill database establishes legislative action and status more reliably than promotional materials do.

There are also material gaps. No available public source permits a definitive accounting of every private conversation, every act of constituent service or every future vote. Some challenger platforms are specific; others are general. Silence on an issue cannot be treated as an answer. Where the present record is incomplete, that is a limitation to disclose rather than hide.

Analysis helps keep the distinctions clear; only by looking at this systemically can any sense be made of it all. A bus route involves ridership, capital planning, street allocation, union staffing, finance and several agencies. A sewage incident can require investigation, temporary safety measures, capital replacement, regulatory compliance and ecological monitoring. A protective-order statute requires both access to relief and procedural fairness. A budget appropriation must eventually become a service, payment or built facility. Those stages have different documentary records and different public actors.

Voting information

Early voting runs October 24 through November 1, 2026. Election Day is Tuesday, November 3, 2026; New York City election-day polling places are scheduled to be open from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. A voter in line before closing may remain to vote. Poll locations for early voting and Election Day can be different. Voters should confirm their own district, polling site, registration and ballot at the Board of Elections or NYC Votes. [2][55][56]

Conclusion

A political election is not a referendum on whether one group of citizens deserves to be heard. It is an exercise of public choice among competing records and proposals. Candidates can share a concern but disagree about implementation. Officials can collaborate on one health or environmental issue while opposing each other on taxation or criminal procedure. An initiative can be worthwhile but not yet enacted; it can be enacted but not yet implemented; it can be implemented without yet having demonstrated the outcome promised.

This guide has approached each candidacy as a subject of inquiry rather than persuasion. We have reported political affiliation without requiring readers to adopt it, identified the legal scope of offices, separated promises from documented work, and disclosed a prior contributor relationship relevant to this publication. Readers can use the numbered sources to review the underlying record and form their own assessments.

Editorial transparency: Sam Pirozzolo was a contributor to StatenIslander.org before his election. Some StatenIslander.org articles cited here reproduce statements or material supplied by elected officials; such material has been identified as official statements where applicable. This article does not endorse any candidate. Research and sources reviewed through October 30, 2026; legislative and ballot information should be verified by readers, of course.

References and source documents

Links below lead to primary legal records, official voter guides, candidate statements, news reports and recorded interviews. Campaign documents establish stated positions; government press statements are attributed official accounts; recorded legislative actions establish bill status. References are not endorsements.

1. NYC Board of Elections, November 3, 2026 General Election Contest List.
2. NYC Votes, official 2026 General Election Voter Guide.
3. NYC Votes, five 2026 ballot proposals and full explanations.
4. Governor Hochul, FY2027 enacted state budget release, May 28, 2026.
5. Spectrum News NY1, full Hochul–Blakeman debate, October 13, 2026.
6. New York Post, reporting on Blakeman’s tax plan and Hochul’s response, October 27, 2026.
7. New York Post, 2026 gubernatorial debate fact-check, October 14, 2026.
8. State Comptroller, Common Retirement Fund report, August 17, 2026.
9. Joseph Hernandez campaign, Issues and proposed comptroller reforms.
10. NY1, full DiNapoli–Hernandez comptroller debate, October 1, 2026.
11. WXXI / New York Public News Network, comptroller candidates, October 30, 2026.
12. NY1, full James–Komatireddy attorney-general debate, October 8, 2026.
13. NY1, debate reporting on Attorney General candidates, October 9, 2026.
14. New York Attorney General, official public records and press releases.
15. Mike DeCillis campaign, detailed 2026 policy platform.
16. Spectrum NY1, DeCillis interview on Inside City Hall, September 28, 2026.
17. Spectrum NY1, Malliotakis and DeCillis election reporting, September 25, 2026.
18. Gothamist/WNYC, 2026 congressional election guide.
19. U.S. House of Representatives, Nicole Malliotakis official office.
20. NYC Votes, Jessica Scarcella-Spanton’s submitted candidate questionnaire.
21. CUNY, Jessica Scarcella-Spanton public-service profile.
22. New York Senate, S5053B, enacted September 28, 2026.
23. New York Senate, S7808A, enacted September 28, 2026.
24. The Gazette New York, direct interview with Ruslan Shamal, September 7, 2026.
25. Ruslan Shamal campaign, Issues.
26. Andrew Lanza, official Senate biography and legislative record.
27. New York Senate, Lanza bill S7241 on repeat auto theft, still in committee.
28. Alexis Rodriguez campaign, published policy proposals.
29. Staten Island Borough President, Clove Lakes contamination summit, October 15, 2026.
30. StatenIslander.org, Clove Lakes response and Parks Department comments, October 21, 2026.
31. NY Assembly, Charles Fall official biography.
32. NY Assembly, Charles Fall sponsored legislation.
33. SILive / Staten Island Advance, Fall–O’Connor-Manasia Face to Face video, October 27, 2026 (republished on Yahoo).
34. NY Assembly, Michael Reilly official site and 2026 toll-tax proposal.
35. NY Assembly, Sam Pirozzolo sponsored legislation.
36. NY Assembly, Pirozzolo energy-policy statement, February 24, 2026.
37. StatenIslander.org, Pirozzolo secession interview and accompanying historical memo, January 17, 2026.
38. Matthew Mobilia campaign, 2026 policy positions.
39. NY Assembly, Michael Tannousis sponsored legislation.
40. Tim (Shpetim) Qorraj campaign, issues and proposed transportation / healthcare actions.
41. League of Women Voters VOTE411, Assembly District 64 candidate information.
42. NY Senate, CREEP Act S3394A, legislative text and action history.
43. New York City Bar Association, June 2026 legal analysis of CREEP Act.
44. NY Senate, Scarcella-Spanton S8940 cannabis-location proposal, in committee.
45. StatenIslander.org, jointly signed request to renew Staten Island opioid funds, February 12, 2026.
46. City & State, 2026 independent expenditure committees and funding.
47. City & State, 2026 special ballot lines and affiliations.
48. NYC Bar Association, evaluations of 2026 Richmond County judicial candidates.
49. NYS Unified Court System, appellate decision validating Vitucci’s nomination, October 2, 2026.
50. NYS Unified Court System, NYC Civil Court judicial directory.
51. NYC Council official member districts and current officeholders.
52. NYC Council, Kamillah Hanks official biography.
53. NYC Council, David Carr official page.
54. NYC Council, Frank Morano official page.
55. NYC Board of Elections, dates and voting information.
56. New York State Board of Elections, ballot certifications.
57. NY State Assembly, 2026 S3394 CREEP companion and passage record.
58. NYC Votes, detailed public arguments on Proposal 5.
59. New York Post, October 30 report on state utility rebates and campaigns.
60. New York Post, October 30 profile of Bruce Blakeman.
61. StatenIslander.org, May 7, 2026 CREEP Act editorial analysis of the non-intimate protective-order gap.