NYC Council gets advice on making their Charter Revision Commission seem legit

The New York City Council is striking back at the Adams administration with plans to launch its own commission to change the city charter, potentially shifting the balance of power between the council and the politically weakened mayor. At an oversight hearing Wednesday, good government watchdogs were all for giving the council more oversight , but cautioned the City Council to not let things get too political.

City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams framed the commission’s formation as a way to strengthen confidence in city government. In the same vein of other commissions that have been formed – the most recent being the controversial Charter Revision Commission convened by Mayor Eric Adams in the spring – appointees would be tasked with reviewing the city’s governing document and eventually, proposing changes to it by way of ballot initiatives. These commissions have led to a number of reforms to city government over the past couple of decades.

While it remains unclear what specific aspects of city government the commission would seek to reshape, Speaker Adams drew a sharp contrast between the City Council’s proposal and the process launched by the mayor. Council members have accused Mayor Adams of convening his commission in a scheme to block a City Council proposal, which would have increased council members’ power to approve or reject mayoral appointees. That process – which the City Council charges was rushed and politically motivated – spanned roughly two months and led to the creation of  Proposals 2-6 on the ballot. 

“We cannot accept this as the norm for Charter Revision Commissions,” Speaker Adams said, explaining she wants the City Council’s commission to restore the process to what it was originally intended to be. “It is crucial that as a city, we prevent this anomaly from becoming our new baseline.”

Speaker Adams said the council’s commission would take at least eight months before submitting ballot proposals for consideration in the 2025 general election or up to 20 months for the 2026 general election. It would consist of up to 17 members – nine of whom would be appointed by Speaker Adams, one by the mayor, one by each borough president, one by the public advocate, and one by the comptroller. (The mayor appointed all 13 members of his commission). No registered lobbyists would be allowed.

It’s likely that the City Council’s commission will again explore expanding members’ power over mayoral appointments.

All four anti-corruption experts who testified at Wednesday’s hearing said that they liked the idea of the City Council’s proposal, albeit to somewhat differing degrees. Former City Council Speaker Christine Quinn in particular expressed enthusiasm for expanding the City Council’s power to be a check on the mayor’s. 

Acknowledging that a number of administrations – including Mayor Adams’ – have called charter commissions to block City Council initiatives over the years, several urged the City Council to be careful using the commission as a political tool to hit back at the mayor.

“We are genuinely tired of seeing charter revision commissions used as political footballs. It happened in the Giuliani administration, it happened in the Bloomberg administration, it happened in the de Blasio administration, and now we live through it in the Adams administration,” said Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause New York, “(That) is not what a charter revision commission is supposed to be about.” Mayor Adams has insisted his commission wasn’t political, and so has its Chair Carlo Scissura.

Eric Lane, former executive director of the 1989 Charter Revision Commission, emphasized the importance of selecting the right members. While seeking input from elected officials is fine, he said, the priority should be appointing independent members and staff who are loyal to the commission – not the City Council. “You’ve built all of the ingredients for a potentially very good commission,” he said. 

Ben Weinberg, Citizens Union director of public policy, suggested that commission appointments should be “more evenly distributed across city government” – as opposed to the current proposed structure in which most of the appointments fall under the purview of Speaker Adams. This would help avoid the perception of the effort being a “council-controlled commission.” As a preferred alternative, he added, the bill should establish either a higher quorum or a supermajority voting requirement, as to encourage agreement from members appointed by different officials.

Asked about the City Council’s plans at his weekly media briefing on Tuesday, the mayor appeared to welcome the idea. 

“I enjoy being in this city and country where the balance of power is crucial, she should not have all the power, I should not have all the power,” Mayor Adams said.