Community Board 7 is being asked to vote on Related’s proposal on July 14 before a CBA is in place. Board Chair Greg Faulkner was critical of the city’s expedited schedule for starting the land use review process precisely because it didn’t give the Board enough time to participate in CBA negotiations.
Faulkner has said the Board is likely to vote for the proposal with conditions. Just voting no wouldn’t give the Board any leverage, he said.
But we suggest another tack. How about voting “no” with conditions? That would send a stronger message to Related and set the tone for negotiations as Related’s proposal navigates the land use review process.
It would also put the city on notice that community boards can’t be rolled and that CBAs must be hammered out before it’s time to vote. Otherwise, what is there to vote on?

