BROOKLYN COMMUNITY BOARD 6
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
FEBRUARY 8, 2016
PRESENT
J. Armer, P. Bellenbaum, P. Blake, G. Kelly, A. Krasnow, R. Luftglass, E. McClure, M. Racioppo, G. Reilly, M. Shames, M. Silverman, S. Turet
EXCUSED
R. Bashner, P. Fleming, R. Levine, S. Lonial, T. Miskel, R. Underwood
MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at 6:38 p.m.
Gary announced that this is his last executive meeting and Wednesday would be his last Board meeting as Chair. Sayar Lonial will serve out the term. Gary will remain on the Community Board until his term runs out, which is March 31st, and will try to attend those meetings as a board member.
ATTENDANCE REVIEW
John Heyer — missed enough meetings to receive a letter. He expressed desire to remain on the Board, would like to continue to represent. Had been up for review before in October 2012. He did not attend his Parks committee meetings at all last year until present, until the last one where he provided good input.
Gary Reilly recommends taking no action at this time.
Jerry Armer moved to accept minutes from the last Executive Committee meeting.
Vote: 10 Yea, 1 Abstention
(Pauline Blake abstained for not present)
STREET CO-NAMING POLICY
CB6 should try to set a higher bar, more rigorous process for getting acceptance for co-named streets. Craig collected policies from other Community Boards and it was reviewed and our policy was created.
Jerry Armer: Some boards have complicated policy. CB6 will try to be clearer. Will keep co-naming as an Executive Committee review function. The policy itself does not require full board approval. Asking for a lot of information with clear information that can be evaluated.
Glenn Kelly: Allows for the same "wiggle room" but also makes it tough, rigorous to get the naming.
Internally: District office will review application first to make sure it is complete, then refer it to Executive Committee.
Externally: Executive Committee will review and make recommendation to full board. Executive committee covers all the committees which may weigh in on who/what makes the application.
Two semi-active pending requests currently.
Bette Stoltz, a portion of Union Street from Carroll Gardens to Gowanus to Park Slope — 3 year waiting would be waived.
Defonte's family member. Was approached prior to adopting policy requiring a waiting period so waiting period could be waived.
Questions are just information? Yes, similar to Liquor License application. This is not criteria but a "bar" is seen as reasons for what would be acceptable. The standards should be listed in the General Guidelines as well as in the questions. Board office will certify that application is complete. Applicant will then come before Executive Committee for review and decision. Final vote on the application will go to the Board.
Rick Luftglass: Stronger framework for what it is that CB6 is looking for should be included. Other policies have done more to explain the goals and criteria that CB6 is looking for — make it clearer and uplifting. Can use some of the other policy language for this.
Mapping could have the co-named street description on an Internet map.
Eric McClure: Moved that we adopt street co-naming request guidelines and application with inclusion of Glenn Kelly and Matt Silverman's suggestions and embellished pre-amble to be supplied by Rick Luftglass.
In the interim, district office should send a working copy to the two current applicants. Jerry Armer seconded the motion.
VOTE: 12 YEAS, 0 NAYS
MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL INTRO 1046-2016, A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE NEW YORK CITY CHARTER, IN RELATION TO POSTING INFORMATION ABOUT COMMUNITY BOARD MEMBERS ONLINE
Intro sponsored by Council Member Ritchie Torres regarding Community Board members.
To expose how people are appointed to the Community Board and make sure the Community Board represents the community. Gather metrics so that elected officials know and community knows.
Craig Hammerman: Good goals but can be improved. We can offer suggestions to make it better. We are not looking to put something before the Board at this time since there are no hearings scheduled yet.
Mike Racioppo suggested that Brooklyn CB9 has become a fracas. There are community members who make things very difficult. Having more information about Community Board members could make it easier for the public to disrupt, attack and otherwise interfere with community board operations.
Currently CB6 has a list of members that has a name, who appointed them and for what current term.
Jerry Armer: Problems with how this is written:
- Employer should not be out there
- Attendance is done independently by the Board
- Demographics
Pauline Blake: Agrees that noting employer is implicating the employer for a position that is a personal one. It could conflict and could mean that employer could take issue.
Craig Hammerman: Board members are treated as public servants as defined by the City Charter so that information should be available anyway.
Craig Hammerman pointed out that Section (b), identifying board members by neighborhood of residence, is not right. To serve you need to live, work in the neighborhood or have some significant interest in the district. We always have board members who don't live in the district.
Matt Silverman: Where people live has been important to how we view who we want to see on the Board. Attendance also will highlight people that way.
Pauline Blake: Problems with asking how much people earn — pits people who make more against less. Problems if someone has a position that the employer does not approve. It should be incumbent on the elected officials to pick people who are valuable regardless of income.
Matt Silverman: Legislation is a solution in search of a problem. Creates a problematic situation with the employer — could be just the field of work/occupation. Demographics is optional, so who will respond?
Eric McClure: Push for more transparency is a good thing.
- Maybe just occupation not employer.
- Attendance records will make it easier and better case.
- Relevant information.
- In some Community Boards, the Board does not represent the community. This can help.
- This bill is activated to try and create community boards that are more representative.
Jerry Armer: Section (e), the bill includes superfluous information that is already available (i.e. who nominated the board member). Intent is good.
Glenn Kelly: Occupation should be listed, but not employer. Why that person wants to serve, even their credentials, could be added.
Matt Silverman: This will move forward. We should have a real response. Ridiculous action that will happen. Take out the worst of this.
Craig Hammerman: If we want to influence the bill moving forward we should provide our notes to our Council Members and Council Member Torres. There's time to amend this before it goes to a hearing.
Unidentified: There is a sense that people who have been on the Board for a while should not be ostracized.
Jerry Armer: We should circulate a draft of our notes from this meeting.
Tentative send-off for Gary Reilly will be after the March Board meeting. All will be invited.