PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Testimony by John Sheridan, Member of the Public
13:03:23
·
129 sec
John Sheridan initially planned to advocate for City Island's special purpose district status but changed his focus based on Chairman Goranik's previous statement about special districts remaining intact. He then critiqued the fundamental theory behind the City of Yes proposal, arguing that increased density does not necessarily lead to affordability, using Manhattan as an example.
- Questioned the logic that increasing density leads to affordability, pointing out that Manhattan, the densest borough, is the least affordable
- Urged council members to vote against the City of Yes proposal, arguing it would exacerbate affordability issues
- Suggested that developers are the primary beneficiaries of the proposal, at the expense of residents
John Sheridan
13:03:23
Good evening.
13:03:24
I was gonna spend my time advocating for City Island's special purpose district status.
13:03:29
But then while I was waiting, I watched recording it yesterday's hearing, and her chart chairman Goranik state that special districts will remain.
13:03:37
He was unequivocal about it convincing me and others that he has no caveats of his sleeve, that there's nothing at all nuanced about what he said, that it's Act, the City Island Special Purpose District will remain.
13:03:48
But if on the other hand I am mistaken in what I heard, then I would appreciate clarification from the chair at some point after my time is up.
13:03:54
Should he choose not to clarify yesterday's statement?
13:03:56
I will take that as affirmation of my initial impression of what's was said about special purpose districts like City Island.
13:04:03
But more importantly, the record will reflect that affirmation.
13:04:06
With the rest of my time then, I want to submit the following.
13:04:09
The city of yes has no close.
13:04:12
The foundational theory upon which it rests is misguided and teetering on the absurd, and I wanna explain, we were told yesterday again that the simple solution to an affordable housing crisis is to build more housing.
13:04:25
We heard it again today.
13:04:27
We heard it today again and again.
13:04:29
We were also told in so many words that until low density neighborhoods that that until now, low density neighborhoods in this city have been protected by so called exclusionary zoning regulations that function to price low income families out of those markets by inflating home values.
13:04:46
Remove those regulations, the theory goes, and property values will come down to more affordable levels.
13:04:52
But if this is so, if increasing density equates to more affordability, then why is the city's densest burrow Manhattan the least affordable?
13:05:00
By their own logic, Manhattan should be the most affordable burrow in this city?
13:05:05
It is so simple, even a child could see it.
13:05:07
And here we are.
13:05:09
I implore you all to see the naked truth, vote no to the lie that a city of yes.
13:05:14
A little more Manhattan in every neighborhood does not solve the affordability problem.
13:05:18
It exacerbates it.
13:05:19
The only people who stand to gain from a little more Manhattan in every neighborhood of the developers in the
UNKNOWN
13:05:24
Thank you.
13:05:25
Your time's expired.
John Sheridan
13:05:27
Profit by it.
13:05:28
Expense in the rest of us.
Kevin C. Riley
13:05:30
Thank you.
John Sheridan
13:05:31
Thank you.
