CM Banks on community engagement, member deference, and protecting Council's institutional authority

So the disagreement is not about whether we should build, but how we build, who participates, and whether communities are treated as genuine partners.

That is why I have reservations about Mr.

Madgen's perspective on community engagement and the role of community board.

These voices should not be treated as procedural obstacles or discounted when their participation requires a project to be reconsidered or improved.

Community boards, tenant leaders, community organizers, neighborhood organizations provide lived experience and local knowledge that cannot be fully captured in a planning document.

Member deference is not absolute, nor should it be used simply to prevent needed housing.

However, it gives the elected representative of an affected community an opportunity to negotiate for greater affordability, meaningful community benefits, and project improvements.

That is not obstruction.

It is representative government.

That principle of meaningful participation should also guide the advice and consent process.

The mayor has the authority to nominate.

But the council has the co-equal, as a co-equal branch of government, has the responsibility to independently evaluate that nominee and advise the mayor accordingly.

Meaningful advice and consent should extend beyond a formal hearing.

The executive branch should come before the council, present its nominee, listen to the concerns of the members, engage in direct one-on-one conversations before asking the body for its consent.

Productive relationship between the executive and the council requires consistent communication, mutual respect, genuine engagement, and particularly when a nominee

may not be significantly influenced, may significantly influence land use decisions across the city.

This is important.

This domination therefore raises larger questions about our responsibility to the council itself.

What are we leaving behind for the next council members?

Each of us should want to leave behind an institution that is stronger, more independent, and better equipped to represent New Yorkers, protecting the council.

Does not mean opposing every mayoral initiative or nominee.

It means recognizing when our authority or our ability to advocate for our communities may be diminished.

Although I'm abstaining today, I hope these remarks serve as a reminder to this body.

If we support nominees whose governing philosophies minimize the council's role or the value of community participation, we risk weakening the institution we were elected to serve.

While I respect Mr.

Madgen's public service and acknowledge his qualifications, I continue to have serious reservations about what his record could mean for community participation, local oversight, and the balance.

of authority in land use decisions.

And for those reasons, I will be abstaining on this nomination and I'll be actually affirming, supporting the other two nominees.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Encarnación.

I vote aye or no.

Car.

Following results.