Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
Mechanisms for balancing local and citywide perspectives in land use
0:46:09
·
122 sec
Chair Richard R. Buery Jr. asks Howard Slatkin for ways to operationalize the balance between local input and citywide perspective in land use decisions. Slatkin suggests enhancing the role of entities with broader purviews, like Borough Presidents or the City Planning Commission, in the later stages of ULURP, as the intended mayoral veto check proved ineffective.
- Slatkin notes the 1989 mayoral veto was meant as a check but is easily overridden or too blunt.
- He proposes strengthening mechanisms for officials representing borough-wide or citywide interests (BPs, CPC) to weigh in meaningfully after initial local review.
- The aim is a process where Council and Commission decisions aren't purely competitive but work towards reconciliation.
Richard R. Buery Jr.
0:46:09
Thank you so much.
0:46:10
I'd like to start with a question.
0:46:12
Can you you ended by talking about the need to balance local input in a citywide perspective.
0:46:18
Can you say a little bit more about how you might operationalize that?
Howard Slatkin
0:46:23
Yes.
0:46:24
And I think that one I you know, I've refrained in this report.
0:46:27
We've refrained from putting a lot of specific detail into it.
0:46:31
But the the the process that was created in 1989 had a a potential check on this process of member deference built into it.
0:46:40
The idea is that the mayor can veto a council action.
0:46:44
Ultimately, there are many things or a number of things, you know, like the triple no and other things that were built into the Euler process in 1989 that ultimately didn't play out the way that that the the Charter Vision Commission thought.
0:46:54
For instance, optional call up of land use items.
0:46:58
The city council calls up everything that has optional call.
0:47:01
The idea was that the council wasn't going to review every local action.
0:47:04
They would only review the big controversial ones.
0:47:06
But in essence, they review every action.
0:47:11
The mayoral veto has proven ineffective for a couple of reasons.
0:47:15
One, the council can override it just as easily as easily as they can, defer to the local member on the original decision.
0:47:23
And second, a kind of flat up or down veto is a very blunt instrument for improving the project at the last stage of the process.
0:47:29
It's kind of like an emergency escape hatch of some it's it's not, a really effective way of, of fine tuning the approval process.
0:47:39
So, I think the the critical thing is finding ways that officials with a broader purview, whether it's the borough presidents, whether it's the planning commission, which has represented representatives of the mayor, the borough presidents, and other citywide officials, finding ways for them to to enhance that role in the later stages of the process, and look for ways that, the council and the commission can make decisions that aren't necessarily in competition with one another.
Richard R. Buery Jr.
0:48:10
Thank you.