City of Yes faces an uncertain path through Queens councilmembers

The Adams administration’s City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is about to come before the City Council. It’s likely to face scrutiny from a majority of Queens’ councilmembers. Eagle photo by Ryan Schwach

By Ryan Schwach

When Mayor Eric Adams’ controversial housing plan comes before the City Council for what is expected to be a marathon two-day hearing this week, it won’t get much of a warm reception from the delegation from Queens.

Ahead of Monday’s hearings, a third of Queens’ councilmembers had already vowed to vote against the proposal known as the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, a package of city zoning changes the mayor and his administration hope will result in the building of “a little more housing in every neighborhood.”

Another third of the Queens delegation told the Eagle they were reluctant to vote in favor of the ambitious proposal, but wouldn’t go as far as to say they’d vote against it.

Even the remaining councilmembers, many of whom are aligned with the policy, have done very little to express their vocal support of the plan.

And while it’s not as though the mayor’s housing plan has been widely celebrated across the city, the opposition to it in Queens has been particularly pronounced.

The majority of the borough’s community boards – 11 out of 14 – have shot it down outright, the most of any borough outside Staten Island, where all three of the borough’s community boards voted against the City of Yes. Several rallies, including a highly attended rally in Bayside last month and one in Howard Beach on Thursday, were held in the borough. Also, one of the leading voices against the plan, Paul Graziano, is based in Queens and has been supported mainly by Queens civic groups.

With the mayor facing vulnerability as he faces an indictment and a host of high level resignations, Adams has diminished political capital in negotiations. Now, the council has his trademark housing policy in their hands, and with that Queens’ councilmembers may play an outsized role in the City of Yes’ future.

As of Friday, five of Queens’ 15 councilmembers planned to vote “no” on the City of Yes as soon as it comes to vote in the council later this year.

“We must vote no, I know I have many colleagues that have not yet spoken up about it, but they are voting no,” said Republican Councilmember Joann Ariola, who spoke at a rally in opposition to COY on Thursday evening.

Ariola, who represents the Rockaway peninsula, Broad Channel, Howard Beach and parts of Woodhaven, argued at the rally that the City of Yes would usurp the city’s rezoning process, which requires developers to at least attempt to win the approval of the local community boards.

“Why should you have your voice silenced? And that's what this proposal does,” she said. “It silences the opinions of the people who live in the community and the people who represent them.”

Ariola has been joined in the “no” column by others in the conservative Common Sense Caucus, including Queens Councilmembers Bob Holden and Vickie Paladino.

Not only has Holden vowed to vote against the City of Yes, he wants it investigated.

"The overwhelming opposition to the City of Yes raises significant questions about the motivations behind the Mayor's decision to proceed with a plan that grants developers broad authority to overdevelop our city," Holden said last month, when he wrote a letter to the prosecutors from the Southern District of New York, the same office that indicted Adams on corruption charges.

Paladino, as well as Councilmember Linda Lee, headlined a rally in Bayside last month in opposition to the City of Yes.

“This is a calculated effort to destroy the character of our districts,” Paladino said.

Lee, while having said she intends to vote the plan down as it currently stands, told the Eagle she’d be open to voting in support of the plan if the administration makes some major changes to it.

“Even though I'm on the record already for being a no on this, I think it doesn't mean I'm not going to try to fight for a lot of the amendments, because if this does pass, we don't want to be left with a plan that really hurts our neighborhoods out here in Eastern Queens,” she told the Eagle. “We haven't had a lot of in-depth conversations with our colleagues about this yet, but I know that there's definitely parts of it that for sure we're going to try to advocate to either take out completely or try to advocate to lessen it.”

Councilmemer Jim Gennaro has said in previous statements he is “vehemently opposed” to the plan as it looks now.

A few Queens Councilmembers have not come out as strongly opposed or in support of the City of Yes, including some of the council’s highest ranking members who hold sway in the body as a whole.

Council Speaker Adrienne Adams and Council Majority Whip Selvena Brooks-Powers – both represent Southeast Queens and have the power to influence the council, have both expressed hesitancies toward certain aspects of the plan.

The speaker hasn’t shied away from fights with the mayor, her fellow Bayside High School classmate. And the City of Yes may again bubble into a spat between the two former Queens kids. At the very least, she’s indicated she may fight to include more provisions in the plan that explicitly spark the creation of affordable housing.

“We recognize that zoning reform is one important component to address the housing shortage facing New York City,” Adams told Gothamist. “Yet, zoning reform alone is not a housing plan and cannot address the wide-ranging housing needs of New Yorkers.”

In a statement to the Eagle, a spokesperson for the speaker said that “there will be meaningful opportunities for input from all stakeholders, and the council will receive New Yorkers' specific feedback on the proposal."

Brooks-Powers often aligns with the speaker and has also expressed worries about the City of Yes.

“[Brooks-Powers] has concerns but plans to continue conversations with the administration and other council colleagues to see if community concerns can be addressed,” a Brooks-Powers’ spokesperson said in a statement to the Eagle.

Brooks-Powers, who represents densely populated neighborhoods in Far Rockaway and Southeast Queens, has opposed some development in her district, arguing the area has already done its fair share of building.

The majority whip’s office said the councilmember has heard strong community pushback about the City of Yes’ provisions that eliminate the requirement for developers to build a certain number of parking spaces and legalize accessory dwelling units like backyard cottages or garages.

Fellow Southeast Queens representative Nantasha Williams has expressed similar sentiments.

"While I commend Mayor Adams and the Department of City Planning for their leadership in tackling the housing crisis and ensuring a robust public review process, I remain concerned about the current version of the City of Yes for Housing proposal," said Williams.

The councilmember pointed to issues with ADUs as well as a proposal that would ease zoning restrictions around train stations.

“We must ensure that any housing policy not only addresses affordability but also protects the character and needs of neighborhoods across the city,” she said. “I look forward to working with my colleagues to see necessary revisions made before I can fully support this bill."

Councilmember Lynn Schulman also said she has “major reservations,” with the proposal.

The handful of the Queens councilmembers who have yet to take a public stance on City of Yes are the four Queens members of the council’s Progressive Caucus.

Councilmembers Tiffany Cabán, Shekar Krishnan and Julie Won have not responded to questions from the Eagle about their stance on COY, and Councilmember Jennifer Gutiérrez declined to comment.

Sources familiar with the progressives’ stance on the issue say that the chaos at City Hall has made it difficult to take a clear, formative stance on the issue, regardless of if they are politically in support of the proposals.

All of Queens’ progressives have long been fierce opponents to the mayor and each called for him to resign following his indictment.

However, the progressives are also generally in support of the increased housing goals City of Yes purports to stand for, leaving the electeds in an awkward position.

People familiar with the situation say the council’s progressives are still working out a more organized response to the mayor's platform.

However, Cabán and Gutiérrez have expressed support for at least one of the proposals under City of Yes.

Last month, Cabán rallied outside City Hall in favor of the COY proposal that would lift parking mandates, and Gutiérrez penned an op-ed in amNY with Manhattan Councilmember Erik Bottcher also in support of lifting the mandates.

“By eliminating parking minimums, we can unlock the potential for more housing units in buildings across the city,” the duo wrote. “This means more affordable options for New Yorkers struggling to find a place to call home. Two parking spots are about the size of a studio apartment, and in the middle of a housing crisis we should not be mandating that valuable space be used for cars.”

However, the op-ed notably does not mention the City of Yes.

The remaining two councilmembers who have yet to take a clear public stance on the City of Yes have been Councilmember Francisco Moya, a close Adams ally, and Flushing Councilmember Sandra Ung, who has also been one of the borough’s biggest Adams supporters.

The City Council’s hearings on the City of Yes kick off Monday with testimony from city officials. It continues on Tuesday when councilmembers will hear from members of the public.