Asm. Stefani Zinerman
Stefani Zinerman represents AD-56, a heavily Democratic Brooklyn district with a D+78 registration lean — 80.4% of registered voters are Democrats against just 2.8% Republican — and has run uncontested in every general election since first winning the seat in 2021; the district carries a base lean of D+86 and rates Safe D across all modeled electoral environments. The district is majority-minority, with 49.8% Black and 21.2% Hispanic residents, a 26.6% poverty rate, a median household income of $74,677, and an exceptionally low homeownership rate of 20.6%, reflecting its dense urban character. In the 2025 session, Zinerman sponsored 51 bills, with her heaviest focus in Public Health (5 bills), Vehicle and Traffic (4 bills), and Economic Development, Real Property, and State Finance (3 bills each). Cannabis regulation accounted for 2 sponsored bills, with floor activity on cannabis dispensary proximity standards reflecting direct engagement with Office of Cannabis Management compliance disputes affecting over 100 licensed dispensaries.AI
Topic Focus AI
Topics extracted by AI from joint Senate-Assembly committee hearing transcripts and floor debate. Tag size reflects number of supporting citations.
Key Issues AI
Key issue areas derived from floor debate speeches and sponsored bill law sections.
Legislative Activity (2025–2026)
Bill sponsorship from NYS Open Legislation API. Hearing appearances from joint Senate-Assembly committee transcripts. Floor debate from official Assembly session transcripts (Granicus, 2023–present).
Bill Focus Areas 2025–2026
Grouped by law section from sponsored Assembly bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation API.
Floor Speeches: In Support (40) AI
Assemblymember Walsh expressed strong support for the bill, noting that financial exploitation of elderly constituents is a serious problem that generates some of the saddest calls to district offices. She stated the bill, which requires the Office for the Aging to develop an awareness campaign on financial exploitation of the elderly, is an important step. She noted the bill passed unanimously last year and expressed hope it will do so again, though she noted there is currently no Senate companion bill.
The bill simply clarifies how cannabis proximity rules are measured while ensuring protections for schools and houses of worship remain intact. It addresses miscommunication from OCM and allows social equity licensees with established locations to operate without fear of relocation.
The bill corrects regulatory guidance from the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) that retroactively deemed over 100 licensed dispensaries non-compliant with proximity requirements. Debate centered on whether the bill unfairly favors cannabis businesses that received inconsistent state guidance versus other small businesses, and whether the cannabis rollout has been problematic overall. Supporters argued the bill restores clarity and fairness to measurement standards without weakening protections for schools (500 feet) or houses of worship (200 feet). Opponents questioned why cannabis businesses receive special legislative remedies unavailable to other regulated industries and expressed broader concerns about the cannabis program's implementation.
Floor Speeches: In Opposition AI
No recorded floor speeches in opposition found in our transcript archive for this member.
Electoral History AD-56
General Elections
| Year | Winner | Runner-up | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Stefani L. Zinerman 100.0% (37,956) | Uncontested | — |
| 2022 | Stefani L. Zinerman 100.0% (25,154) | Uncontested | — |
| 2020 | Stefani L. Zinerman 100.0% (45,103) | Uncontested | — |
| 2018 | Tremaine S. Wright 100.0% (36,519) | Uncontested | — |
| 2016 | Tremaine S. Wright 100.0% (41,836) | Uncontested | — |
| 2014 | Annette M. Robinson 98.0% (14,648) | Garnsey Lee Alston 2.0% (306) | 96.0pts |
| 2012 | Annette M. Robinson 98.6% (36,891) | Francenia Sims-Hall 1.4% (510) | 97.2pts |
| 2010 | Annette M. Robinson 97.7% (17,705) | Garnsey Lee Alston 2.3% (425) | 95.4pts |
| 2008 | Annette M. Robinson 98.5% (30,911) | Henry C. Snead, Sr. 1.5% (477) | 97.0pts |
| 2006 | Annette M. Robinson 100.0% (12,785) | Uncontested | — |
| 2004 | Annette M. Robinson 97.5% (27,146) | Mayra Radden 2.5% (704) | 95.0pts |
| 2002 | Annette M. Robinson 97.3% (14,642) | Stanley Kinard 2.7% (402) | 94.6pts |
| 2000 | Albert Vann 96.1% (23,415) | Aaron Bramwell 2.0% (487) | 94.1pts |
| 1998 | Albert Vann 95.4% (14,717) | Richard Taylor 2.4% (376) | 93.0pts |
| 1996 | Albert Vann 95.1% (18,754) | Ernestine M. Brown 3.9% (765) | 91.2pts |
Primary Elections
| Year | Winner | Runner-up | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 (Democratic) | Stefani L. Zinerman 57.0% (10,171) | Justin Cohen 43.0% (7,665) | 14.0pts |
| 2016 (Democratic) | Tremaine S. Wright 59.0% (3,876) | Karen Z. Cherry 41.0% (2,698) | 18.0pts |
Special Elections
| Year | Winner | Runner-up | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 | Annette M. Robinson 85.5% (2,177) | Arthur Bramwell 9.7% (246) | 75.8pts |
Source: NYS Board of Elections certified results. ⚡ = margin under 10 pts. District history reflects 2022 redistricted boundaries.
Vulnerability Index AD-56
Base lean: D+86
- Limited contested election data — registration lean used as primary signal
- Ran uncontested in most recent election
Scenario model: ±5pt national environment shift applied to district base lean (D+86). Base lean blends voter registration (40%) with recent contested general election margins (60%), using up to the last 4 general elections with margins under 40 points. Ratings: Safe D/R = 15+ pts, Likely = 8–14 pts, Lean = 3–7 pts, Toss-up = within 2 pts (Assembly districts are smaller and more homogeneous than Senate districts, so tighter thresholds are used). Generic ballot from Silver Bulletin (Nate Silver), as of 5/21/2026. Not a prediction — reflects structural competitiveness under different cycle environments.
District 56 Profile
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (2024).
Voter Registration
Demographics
Commute Mode
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2024). Race and ethnicity figures may not sum to 100% — Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity category that overlaps with racial groups.
Lobbying Activity
No lobbying disclosures on record for this member in the available dataset.
Source: NY Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government via data.ny.gov.