Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
Discussion on the nature of "member deference" and how to frame reforms
0:42:57
·
115 sec
Executive Director Alec Schierenbeck argues that the current system of "member deference" distorts the original intent of ULURP, which was to balance local input with broader city and borough interests, not to give a hyperlocal veto.
Commissioner Kathryn Wylde suggests member deference is a "legislative courtesy" and recommends the commission's report focus on strengthening other roles rather than directly naming the practice.
Commissioner Lisette Nieves emphasizes the importance of clarifying that reforms aim to expedite appropriate building and broaden input, not to enable out-of-scale development.
- Schierenbeck highlights that the 1975 and 1989 ULURP frameworks did not envision the current power of member deference.
- Wylde proposes avoiding the term "member deference" in final recommendations, focusing instead on positive structural changes.
- Schierenbeck defends the preliminary report's directness in addressing member deference as an "open secret."
- Nieves stresses the need to communicate that reforms are about sensible, expedited development and increased, not diminished, input.
Alec Schierenbeck
0:42:57
That is the procedure the the the framers of those amendments put to the voters, and that is the procedure that the voters approved, not just in 1975, but again in 1989.
0:43:09
The system of member deference, has sort of accrued over time and now is cement, right, is a system that I think distorts the land use review procedure that the voters that New Yorkers approved, and that's been revealed by experience over time.
0:44:07
Well, I mean, I think member deference is an open secret, and this preliminary report has tried to speak about it the way you would speak about it if you took truth serum.
0:44:16
That's certainly how I I looked at this report.
0:44:18
And
Kathryn Wylde
0:43:28
I think that language is important.
0:43:30
It's not a system.
0:43:32
It's a courtesy, a legislative courtesy that is now being applied in ways that are that were not predicted, to your point.
0:43:41
I don't think I don't think we should address in the primary report, in our recommendation.
0:43:47
I don't think we should even mention member deference because I it's not a law.
0:43:53
We should just ignore it, and we should point out that we're reinforcing the role of the borough presidents and the community boards to participate and the role of the speaker of the city council.
0:44:19
Thanks, Ed.
Diane Savino
0:43:52
It's in here, though.
Lisette Nieves
0:44:20
Alec, I'd like to jump in, actually, on a couple of points.
0:44:24
One is the first point is that, particularly with member difference, I'd love the document to refer to where there has been a lot of voice and input and recognition that we that we are double clicking on the point that was said that this is not about building, you know, a hundred story building in Staten Island, that this is really about expediting building and that we're actually broadening some input on that.
0:44:48
I think that's an important point.
0:44:49
Right?
0:44:49
It's not just semantics.
0:44:50
It's actually an important value.