Thursday, September 10, 2026, 11 a.m. (New York City time), 250 Broadway - 8th Floor - Hearing Room 3
Committee: Committee on Rules, Privileges, Elections, Standards and Ethics
The Committee on Rules, Privileges, Elections, Standards and Ethics, chaired by Council Member Sandra Ung, voted on three mayoral appointments under the Council's advice-and-consent powers: Lisa Garcia to the New York City Land Bank, Dr. Dave Choe to the Board of Health, and John Manjin as chair of the Board of Standards and Appeals. Members explained their votes at length, with debate focused largely on Manjin's prior writings and role in charter revision proposals affecting the Council's land use authority. The chair announced the results: Garcia approved 9-0, Choe approved 8-1, and Manjin approved 6-1 with 2 abstentions.
0:08 Oh copy.
0:08 Good morning welcome to the
0:09 committee vote on rules
0:12 privileges elections standards
0:13 and ethics at this time we ask
0:14 that you please silence all
0:17 electronics and please do not
0:18 approach the dais chair you
0:22 begin good morning and welcome
0:24 to this meeting of the
0:25 committee on rules privileges
0:27 election standard and ethics
0:29 I'm councilmember Sandra owens
0:31 chaired a committee before we
0:32 begin I would like to
0:34 recognize other members as
0:35 committee who are present
0:38 Council Member krishna and
0:38 Council Member league council
0:40 member carnell xii on the
0:41 council medical Banks and
0:42 deputy speaker natasha
0:44 Williams minor I d that David
0:46 Carr is on remote and majority
0:48 her shampoo also like like the
0:50 council to the committee
0:52 Amanda De gracia and the
0:53 committee staff that I worked
0:55 on hearing she ever counsel
0:57 and director of public
0:59 integrity unit per month and
1:01 deputy director of public
1:02 integrity alicia vassal today
1:04 we are voting on three items
1:06 at this committee harness
1:07 center refers to 20 26 we are
1:10 voting on a resolution t
1:13 oapprove 87 Mayor zara ahmed
1:16 pursuant to local law 56 of
1:20 2026 for the counsel's advice
1:21 and consent and we're going t
1:23 oof commissioner lisa garcia t
1:25 oserve as a member of the New
1:27 York City land bank for a term
1:27 of four years there were
1:30 expires September 9 2030.
1:32 Also vonnie a a resolution
1:34 to approve m 88 the mayor's
1:36 request pursuant to section 31
1:38 of the New York City charter
1:40 for the counsel's advice and
1:41 consent regarding the
1:42 appointment of dr dave chachi
1:44 to serve as a member of the
1:45 New York City board of health
1:47 for the remainder a six year
1:47 term that would expire on May
1:51 31 2030 and lastly b of o'neil
1:52 resolution to approve m 89 the
1:55 mayor's request also pursuant
1:56 to section 31 of the New York
1:58 City charter for the
1:59 appointment of john manchin t
2:00 oserve on the New York City
2:02 board of standards of appeals
2:03 for the remainder of the sixth
2:05 year term that will expire on
2:09 October 6 2027 the Mayor has
2:10 indicated his intent t
2:13 odesignate manchin as the chair
2:14 please call the row you good
2:21 morning william martin
2:22 committee clerk roll call vote
2:24 committee on rules privileges
2:26 elections standards and ethics
2:27 items are coupled cheer on
2:30 ever I'll know Riley Abreu I
2:38 Krishnan I li Epstein Williams.
2:48 Permission to explain my
2:54 vote yes thank you I I will be
2:56 voting I am favor of john
2:59 manager's nomination to serve
2:59 as chair of the board of
3:01 standards and appeals I
3:03 approached this nomination
3:04 with serious questions
3:06 regarding man jin's previous
3:07 writings on homeowners
3:09 neighborhood opposition t
3:11 odevelopment whether or not
3:12 there should be certain
3:14 community and Council Member
3:16 inclusion and the role that
3:17 should play in land use
3:19 decisions I appreciate the
3:21 additional context
3:22 clarifications he provided
3:22 regarding those writings as
3:23 well as the thoughtful
3:25 responses he offered during
3:26 this process as someone who
3:28 represents communities of
3:30 generations of working and
3:32 middle class black homeowners
3:34 I believe our housing
3:35 conversation must recognize
3:37 that homeowners of color do
3:39 not always fit neatly into the
3:40 narratives often used and
3:42 brought debates around
3:44 development preserving
3:46 neighborhood character and
3:47 protecting long standing
3:48 homeowners does not have to be
3:49 at odds with building more
3:51 housing my own work on the
3:52 jamaican neighborhood plan
3:54 reflects that balance I have
3:56 supported a major pro housing
3:58 neighborhood plan that would
3:59 create thousands of New homes
4:00 while fighting for the
4:03 infrastructure affordability
4:04 public rome investments in
4:06 community protections
4:07 necessary to ensure growth
4:09 benefits the people who
4:10 already call our neighborhoods
4:11 home I was encouraged by man
4:13 jean's recognition that
4:15 neighborhood character is
4:16 contextual in area is
4:18 consisting predominantly of 1
4:20 and 2 family homes warrant a
4:21 different analysis than
4:23 neighborhoods with
4:24 significantly different built
4:25 . Forms I also appreciate his
4:26 commitment to changing how the
4:29 engages with communities
4:30 manchin has committed t
4:32 oproactively engaging council
4:33 members on significant
4:34 applications in their district f
4:37 contact with counsel offices
4:39 and seeking input from
4:41 community stakeholders rather
4:43 than simply waiting for
4:43 concerns to reach the fat he
4:46 also proposed beginning public
4:48 education and training for
4:50 counsel offices community
4:51 boards faith based
4:53 organizations and other
4:54 constituencies within his
4:56 first six months that type of
4:57 proactive engagement does not
4:59 sufficiently exist today and I
5:00 believe it can make the more
5:02 transparent accessible and
5:04 responsive to the communities
5:05 affected by its decisions my
5:08 vote today is therefore not an
5:09 endorsement of every single
5:10 position manchin has taken
5:13 throughout his career it
5:14 reflects the totality of this
5:16 process the context he has
5:18 provided and the commitments
5:19 he has made about how he
5:20 intends to lead the I intend
5:22 to hold him to those
5:23 commitments and look forward
5:24 to working with him to ensur
5:26 ethat we can build the housing
5:27 New York City desperately
5:29 needs our respecting the
5:32 distinct histories homeowners
5:33 and the character of our
5:35 neighborhoods thank you and
5:36 again of o I
5:37 . Thank you Council Member leeo
5:41 I vote yes on garcia and choke
5:43 shoe and abstain on mention
5:46 . Thank you Council Member I I
5:49 thank you Banks I have
5:52 permission to explain my vote
5:54 yes thank you Madam chair you
5:57 know advice and consent
6:00 matters and oh I take that a
6:05 very serious a man and a that
6:06 was given to us by the charter
6:08 of the New York and it matters
6:13 when we executed and how we
6:14 executed so as we consider the
6:17 nomination of john majin you
6:18 believe we must look beyond
6:22 his professional
6:23 qualifications and consider
6:24 the decisions and priorities
6:26 and governing philosophy and
6:27 that have shaped his in City
6:31 government my concern is not
6:33 based on one policy a
6:35 disagreement
6:35 . It is rooted in an approach
6:38 to land use that appears to
6:41 prioritize efficiency and
6:43 centralized decision making
6:45 over public participation
6:47 local accountability and
6:49 institute and the
6:49 institutional role of the City
6:51 council missed imagined played
6:53 a significant role in
6:54 advancing the City of yas
6:56 agenda and developing housing
6:58 related ballot proposals that
7:00 altered the council's role in
7:02 certain land use decisions
7:04 while expanding the authority
7:06 of the appoint of expanding
7:09 the authority of appointed
7:11 bodies but although voters
7:13 passed those ballot questions
7:14 during the private council
7:18 session their efforts there
7:20 effects will influence the
7:21 institution for years to come
7:24 these changes were not
7:25 necessary to make the council
7:28 pro housing
7:29 . Before the ballot
7:30 initiatives the council
7:32 approved approximately 94% of
7:35 hewlett applications we've
7:36 also continued exploring
7:38 creative housing opportunities
7:39 and speaker manning's a New
7:41 library's New homes initiative d
7:46 . Modernize public libraries
7:47 while creating hundreds of
7:50 100% affordable housings above
7:53 library sites you know our
7:53 housing agenda also create
7:55 meaningful pathways to
7:58 homeownership building more
8:00 housing is essential but so is
8:02 giving New yorkers at every
8:05 income level especially black
8:06 and brown New yorkers who have
8:09 historically faced barriers t
8:11 oownership the opportunity t
8:12 obuild generation well and own
8:14 a piece of the City they call
8:17 home the council has been pro
8:18 housing and remains committed
8:21 to building so the
8:22 disagreement is not about
8:24 whether we should build but
8:27 how we build
8:28 . Who participates and whether
8:30 communities are treated as
8:32 genuine partners and that is
8:35 why I have reservations about
8:38 imagines perspective on
8:40 community engagement and the
8:41 role of community boards these
8:44 are voices should not be
8:47 treated as procedural
8:49 obstacles or discounted when
8:50 they are requires a project t
8:54 obe reconsidered or improved
8:57 community boards tenant
8:59 leaders community organizers
9:01 neighborhood organizations
9:01 provide lived experience and
9:03 local knowledge that cannot be
9:06 fully captured and they
9:08 planning document remember
9:09 deference is not absolute nor
9:11 should it be used simply t
9:14 an affected community andowevers
9:22 opportunity to negotiate for
9:25 greater affordability
9:26 meaningful community benefits
9:29 and project improvements that
9:30 is not obstruction
9:32 . It is a replica it is a
9:33 represent it is representative
9:34 government that principle of
9:37 meaningful participation
9:37 should also guide the advice
9:40 and consent process the Mayor
9:41 has the authority to nominate
9:44 but the council has the co
9:45 equal as a co equal branch of
9:47 government has the
9:49 responsibility t
9:50 oindependently evaluate that
9:52 nominee and advise the Mayor
9:55 accordingly meaningful advice
9:56 and consent should extend
9:58 beyond a formal hearing the
10:00 executive branch should come
10:02 before the council present its
10:03 nominee listen to the concerns
10:06 of the members engage and
10:06 direct one on one
10:08 conversations before axing the
10:09 body for its consent a
10:13 productive relationship
10:13 between the executive and the
10:15 counsel requires consistent
10:19 communication mutual respect
10:20 genuine engagement and
10:21 particularly when a nominee
10:25 not be significantly influence
10:28 insignificantly significantly
10:29 influence land use decisions
10:30 across the City this is
10:32 important this domination
10:33 therefore raises larger
10:34 questions about our
10:35 responsibility to the council
10:38 itself what are we leaving
10:39 behind for the next council
10:42 members.
10:42 Each of us should want to
10:44 leave behind an institution
10:47 that is stronger more
10:49 independent and better
10:50 equipped to represent New
10:51 yorkers protecting the council
10:54 does not mean opposing.
10:56 Every mariel initiative or
10:57 nominee it means recognizing
11:00 when our authority or our
11:01 ability to advocate for our
11:03 communities be diminished.
11:05 What I'm abstaining today I
11:09 hope these remarks serve as
11:11 reminded to this body if we
11:14 support nominees whose
11:16 governing philosophies
11:17 minimize the council's role or
11:20 or the value of community
11:23 participation we was weakening
11:25 the institution we were
11:25 elected to serve while I
11:29 respect imagine public service
11:31 and acknowledge his
11:33 qualifications I continue t
11:35 ohave serious reservations
11:36 about what his record could
11:38 mean for community
11:41 participation local oversight
11:42 and the balance of authority
11:44 in land use decisions and for
11:46 those reasons I will be
11:48 abstaining on this nomination
11:51 and I'll be actually a
11:54 affirming a supporting the
11:54 other two nominees thank you
11:57 thank you Madam chair
12:06 Encarnación I vote iron ore
12:18 car following results
12:19 permission to explain my vote
12:22 yes thank you chair ong ah
12:26 good morning holly g's I'm
12:28 going to be talking about all
12:29 three nominees this morning
12:30 they're all very important t
12:32 othe future of the City and
12:33 I'll start with commissioner
12:35 garcia's appointment to the
12:37 land bank I was among the
12:38 several members who voted
12:39 against the creation of the
12:41 land bank last term and even
12:44 though I'm an absolute
12:45 opponent of the lien sale
12:47 system that it seeks to reform
12:49 and replace
12:49 . I have grave concerns still
12:51 about its mission and purpose
12:53 and how it will actually
12:55 operate in practice.
12:56 That being said I do think
12:58 the commissioner of
12:59 environmental protection is
13:00 very qualified to serve on it
13:02 and any person that capacity
13:04 probably should serve on the
13:05 land bank.
13:06 Given that the agency they
13:08 need has such an important
13:10 role in placing of leans on
13:12 private homes
13:13 . That that could eventually
13:16 lead to a property coming
13:18 . Under the purview of the
13:19 landing so I'll be supporting
13:23 commissioner garcia's
13:24 appointment unfortunately I
13:24 cannot see and say the same
13:26 for the other two dr choe she
13:28 is the one of the leading um
13:31 the employee City employee
13:33 mandate system that caused so
13:35 many City workers to not only
13:36 lose their livelihoods but the
13:38 careers to which they were
13:41 passionately attached and
13:41 based on his testimony at the
13:43 hearing we held earlier this
13:46 month he remains a steadfast
13:49 in support of that decision
13:51 one that simply isn't
13:52 supported by the science
13:52 . Despite the fact that it's
13:55 clear that the vaccine mandate
13:57 did not do anything to stop
13:58 the spread he still maintains
14:00 that it was the right decision
14:02 because of the lives that it
14:05 saved this is a dangerous
14:07 precedent for a person t
14:07 oserve on the board of health
14:10 to have because essentially
14:11 what he's saying is that any
14:13 public health mandate that
14:15 could be life saving or health
14:16 saving to the individual is
14:19 justified.
14:20 Public health mandates are
14:21 only justified when you seek
14:24 to protect others from the
14:25 health care decisions made by
14:27 or not made by other
14:28 individuals so I think this is
14:29 not a position of someone who
14:32 should be on the board of
14:33 health
14:34 . And finally we come t
14:35 omanjon and his appointments t
14:36 othe chair of the New York City
14:38 border of standards and
14:39 appeals it's the reason most
14:40 of us are really here today t
14:43 ospeak and we are here as
14:44 members because the voters of
14:46 our district have entrusted us
14:48 to make decisions on their
14:49 behalf and to represent their
14:51 best
14:51 . Interests but in recent
14:52 years we have witnessed our
14:54 Powers both individually and