Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
TESTIMONY
Testimony by Heather Beers-Dimitriadis from Queens Community Board 6 on community engagement in land use
3:14:14
·
3 min
Heather Beers-Dimitriadis, Chair of Queens Community Board 6, testifies that marginalizing the advisory role of community boards will erode public confidence in government and not result in more affordable housing.
Using a volleyball metaphor, she describes the current ULURP process as a collaborative sequence where the community board, borough president, and council member each improve a project.
She warns that disrupting this sequence with a fast track or simultaneous review would lead to worse projects and a dangerous erosion of public faith.
- Beers-Dimitriadis argues that creating a fast track for land use will erode public confidence in local government.
- She uses a volleyball analogy to illustrate how the current sequential review process allows for collaboration and improvement of projects.
- She provides an example of a project in her district where this collaborative process resulted in deeper affordability.
- She believes that meaningful community engagement is the foundation of equitable development, not an obstacle to it.
Heather Beers-Dimitriadis
3:14:14
Good evening, commissioners.
3:14:15
My name is Heather Beers Demetriadis.
3:14:17
I am the chair of Queens Community Board six serving Regal Park and Forest Hills.
3:14:21
We are witnessing a decline in confidence in government, both federal and local.
3:14:25
Community boards, despite a very small operating budget, work hard to earn and keep the trust of their community, and no issue is more important to a community than how land is utilized.
3:14:36
It is my opinion that marginalizing the advisory role of community boards by creating a fast track will only succeed at eroding public confidence in its most local form of city government and will not result in more affordable housing.
3:14:50
In 2022, Queens Community Board six received a presentation for 9881 Queens Boulevard.
3:14:56
The initial proposal included a variety of affordable units at various levels of AMI.
3:15:01
However, the board voted against the proposal requesting deeper affordability along with a variety of other conditions.
3:15:07
As the proposal moved through ULURP, the project moved improved greatly, deepening affordability and meeting various conditions that we had initially requested.
3:15:17
In volleyball, there was a play called bounce setter volley bounce.
3:15:20
This is how I see ULURP.
3:15:22
Player a sets up the ball, the community board.
3:15:25
We set the ball by providing the necessary recommendations that make this product project the best fit for the community.
3:15:31
Player b, the borough president, bounces that ball by taking those recommendations and working with the developers to get the concerns addressed.
3:15:39
Then he bounces that ball over to the council member who the goal for her or she or he or they is to spike that ball and get a much more improved and at each level improving and making that process better, that proposal stronger.
3:15:53
This is why ninety eight eighty one Queens Boulevard was successful and is now bringing in tenants for these affordable units.
3:16:01
Simultaneous community board and borough president review will remove the opportunity to collaborate and get a better project for the community and the borough.
3:16:09
Your proposal would allow borough presidents to decide on a project prior to the board's decision, Whereas I believe borough president Richards would wait for the community board's decision, we can't assume that the next VP will.
3:16:21
As certain districts in our city continually say no to affordable housing projects, it would be quite tempting for the borough president to approve or to give his deliberation on a project prior to the community board's vote in an attempt to try to sway their opinion.
3:16:37
In conclusion, meaningful community engagement is not an obstacle to progress.
3:16:41
It is the very foundation of sustainable, equitable development.
3:16:45
When community boards are given the respect and time they need to do their job, we see better projects and stronger public trust.
3:16:54
The volleyball metaphor illustrates what collaborative government looks like, each player fulfilling a vital role to achieve a common goal, stripping away this sequence by marginalizing community boards or disrupting the order of review risks not only procedural confusion but also a dangerous erosion of public faith in city government.
3:17:14
We urge the commission to recognize that true progress requires partnership, not shortcuts, keeps the community
Richard R. Buery Jr.
3:17:21
in time.
Heather Beers-Dimitriadis
3:17:21
I just have one more, please.
3:17:23
I worked on this.
3:17:24
Keep the community in the process, and you will keep the public in your corner.
3:17:30
Thank you.
3:17:30
You gotta have the conversations.
3:17:33
They're hard.
3:17:33
They're brutal.
3:17:34
You gotta have them.
Richard R. Buery Jr.
3:17:35
Next up, we have Alan Cox and Victor Edwards.