The members of the land use committee of West Harlem’s Community Board 9 wasted no time in addressing a controversial staffing change on Tuesday night. They didn’t even get through roll call.
“I’m Victor Edwards, I’m chair of the board. I’ve lived in the community for the past 45 years, been on the board 13 years,” Edwards began.
“And I just wanted to say thank you to our co-chairs who have done outstanding jobs — so well, that they’re not being reappointed to this board.”
Another member, Tiffany Khan, chimed in after her introduction. “When you serve good trouble, these are the things that happen.”
The two chairs of the Housing, Land Use, and Zoning committee of CB9, Liz Waytkus and Signe Mortensen, were informed last Friday, May 9, that they would not be reappointed to their seats on the community board for the coming year.
To them, the reason is obvious: the board had interrogated developers and slowed their plans for the neighborhood — and their vocally pro-housing local elected officials, City Councilmember Shaun Abreu and Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, didn’t like that.
“We are not here to function at the behest of an elected official,” said Waytkus at the meeting. “We’re here to serve the community.”
It’s the latest instance in a pattern of Levine, who has the final say on board members, appointing people who would consider themselves to be pro-housing and pushing those who have stymied development processes out. Last summer, the New York Times reported that Levine had made it his mission to reshape the boards in order to make his housing goals a reality, saying “this is an area where I have some direct levers to pull.” At the time, critics accused Levine of being self-serving as he receives donations from the real estate industry, and the influx of members who share his views — many affiliated with a single nonprofit, Open New York — caused mass resignations on other Manhattan boards.
Combined with other recent departures, it’s left the subcommittee with only two members — and a dearth of institutional knowledge, as Mortensen and Waytkus had both been on the board for over a decade. New members will soon be added, but many voiced concerns about the subcommittee’s ability to get things done.
“[Abreu and Levine] don’t care whether or not the board is functioning — they just want the board to stop voicing opinions they don’t like,” said Barry Weinberg, former chair of Community Board Nine.
‘A Bad Precedent’
Waytkus and Mortensen believe that there are two specific construction projects at the heart of the conflict: a partially-affordable apartment building at 701 West 135th Street that would be cantilevered over Amtrak train tracks, and plans for 1727 Amsterdam Ave that would build supportive and affordable housing on the site of a medical center.
Community boards do not have the ability to halt developments: rather, they incorporate feedback from the community and make recommendations that developers can use to indicate to those with real power like members of the City Council that their projects are wanted. The boards also have influence over their elected representatives as the voice of their constituents — if a community board is loudly against something, it makes it harder for their City Council member to vote it through.
“The community voted nearly unanimously that these projects were flawed or a danger to the community,” said Waytkus of the public comment process for the developments during her goodbye speech to the full board on Thursday, May 15.
Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine speaks at a rally outside the New York Public Library’s main branch, April 10, 2025. Credit: Ben Fractenberg/THE CITY
But she maintained that the board’s aim was not to stop the housing project completely: instead, it recommended an even bigger development.
“Not only did we not say no to housing at 1727 [Amsterdam Ave.], but we suggested that plot be upzoned to create a better mix of supportive and affordable housing,” she said to the room of over 30 people. “Don’t tell me that Community Board 9 is stopping Shaun, Mark, or the city from moving forward.”
The decision to re-appoint someone to a community board or not is well within the borough president’s power. Levine’s office said they “do not comment on individual decisions,” but that “re-appointments are not automatic,” and that they received over 950 applications, including over 200 re-applications.
“We aim for a balance of new and veteran voices and prioritize diversity of backgrounds and viewpoints,” BP spokesperson Reuben Torres continued.
But Waytkus worries that moves like this will prevent future appointees from going against the views of Levine or other elected officials.
“My concern is that this sets a bad precedent for anyone that becomes chair, that they will feel intimidated,” she told THE CITY on a Zoom call with her fellow former co-chair.
Mortensen chimed in: “A dangerous precedent.”
Though Levine is the ultimate decider on community board applications, Waytkus, Mortensen and their fellow board members say that his opinion on this was likely influenced by Abreu — who doesn’t necessarily deny this.
The Council member doesn’t contest that he is nominating applicants with specific goals in mind: “Our district is facing an affordable housing crisis, and we need leaders who are willing to engage constructively in solving it,” Abreu wrote in a statement to THE CITY. “As part of the community board appointment process, I nominated applicants who I believe reflect the needs and values of our community. That includes a willingness to address our housing crisis head-on, by prioritizing the public interest.”
But board members like Waytkus and Mortensen feel they understand the public’s desires better than he does. The CB holds meetings and facilitates public comment on projects like these — plus, the development of city land requires an enormous amount of public input as part of processes like the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP).
“If he has information that the community supports those [developments], I would challenge him to find that information and bring it to us,” Waytkus told THE CITY. “We have our own documentation of the official ULURP that happened for 701 [West 135th Street] and feedback from the community on 1727 [Amsterdam Avenue]. I’d like to see his proof that he stands with a community that supports this.”
The two former co-chairs also don’t believe that it’s fair to characterize them as against housing.
“We voted for all three sections of ‘City of Yes,’” Waytkus told THE CITY, referring to the Adams administration’s hallmark housing plan to re-zone areas of the city to allow more dense residential construction. The majority of community boards voted against the plan, though it was more popular in areas where there is already dense housing, like Manhattan.
“We’re not the community board of no,” said Mortensen. “That’s our motto.”
Waytkus added, “Bring us a good project — if you don’t bring us a good project, we’re creative enough to think, ‘How can we take this bad project and make it better, and make the community want to have whatever this new thing is?’”
Our nonprofit newsroom relies on donations from readers to sustain our local reporting and keep it free for all New Yorkers. Donate to THE CITY today.
The post Manhattan Beep Boots Community Board Members Who Criticized New Housing appeared first on THE CITY – NYC News.
