Infinite George on NYCHA transparency and resident voting rights
George describes inconsistent NYCHA processes where some developments vote on PACT/Trust/Section 9 options while others are selected for PACT without resident votes, creating confusion and distrust. He urges requiring transparent resident elections before any major conversion model proceeds.
Should I go or are we going to reset?
Good afternoon, Chair.
My name is Infinite George, and I work directly with NYCHA residents across New York City.
I'm here because residents are deeply concerned about the lack of transparency surrounding decisions that will determine the future of their homes.
NITRE residents know that their development needs major repairs.
They live every day with broken elevators, leaks, mold, heating problems, and years of deferred maintenance.
Residents want investment and improvement, but they also want and deserve a meaningful role in deciding how those improvements happen.
Right now, the process is inconsistent.
In some developments, residents participate in an election to choose among the Public Housing Preservation Trust, PAC, or remaining in traditional Section 9 program.
At other developments, residents learn that their homes have already been selected for RADA PAC without having the opportunity to vote on their own.
This inconsistency creates confusion and distrust.
Residents do not understand why one development received a vote while another does not.
They are often unsure how the development was selected, what decisions have already been made, and how a conversation will affect
property management, repairs, resident rights, employment opportunities, and daily life.
Information sessions and resident engagement meetings are important, but they are not the same as giving residents the power to decide.
Nature residents are the people who live with the consequences of these decisions.
They should receive clear, accessible information about every option, including the benefits, risks, financing structure, management changes, construction plans, and resident protections before any decision is made.
We are asking the city to require a transparent resident election process before any nature development proceeds with PAC-RAD, the Preservation Trust, or another major conversion model.
May I finish?
Every eligible resident should have the opportunity to vote, and every development should be governed by the same and clear, consistent rules.
In closing, public housing belongs to the public, and residents must be at the center of decisions about its future.
No major change should happen to a nature development without informed consent of the people who call it home.
Thank you.