CM Banks Q&A: Mangin on legitimate opposition and reconciling writings with current views
Banks asks how Mangin determines whether opposition is legitimate. Mangin says he never thinks of input as legitimate or illegitimate. Banks then asks him to reconcile his writings about NIMBYs with saying communities should be heard; Mangin points to his career-long support for broad participation.
Well, let's imagine for a moment that residents from the 42nd Council District opposed the development
because of concerns about displacement, infrastructure, lack of parking, affordability, or even changes to the neighborhood's character.
How would you determine whether those residents are legitimately protecting their community or simply standing in the way of development?
And where do you draw the line?
Thank you, Councilmember.
Again, local voices are absolutely paramount.
I don't, I never think of it in terms of, is this input legitimate?
Is this not legitimate?
It's all input, and when it comes from the local community, it deserves a central place in the consideration of those actions.
In your responses to the council, you say neighborhood input should be listened to, quote, most closely and carefully, unquote,
while also saying neighborhood voices should not be unilaterally decisive.
Help me reconcile that with your earlier writings about NIMBYs and anti-development activists and public processes that can delay housing.
When you say communities should be held, heard, what does that actually mean in practice?
Thank you, Councilmember.
I mean, I truly believe that the voices of everyone affected by land use decisions should be part of the decision-making process.
And I don't think that's always been the case in New York City.
Like I outlined in my responses to council questions as well, I think some of the neighborhoods that we think of as being under extreme pressure
In New York City.
Again, the central Brooklands, the east Brooklands, northern Manhattan, south Bronx, parts of Queens.
Those are a result of decisions that were made elsewhere.
My division, we made a map.
We looked at sort of all the different types of protective land use actions that were taken in New York City since the 1960s.
You know, down zonings or restrictive special districts or limited height districts or things like that.
And when we created that map, you could see the neighborhoods that were under pressure today.
They were the blank spaces on the map.
Those were the areas that were not protected.
And that, to me, illustrated in stark graphic terms the way decisions made in other parts of the city affected those blank spaces on the map.
And so it's just, if you go back to the paper, if you go back to big city-wides like City of Yes for Housing Opportunity,
It's all a piece of the same theme, the same argument, that everybody who is affected by a land use decision should have a voice in the process.
Madam Chair, I just have a couple more questions, if you may indulge.