April 19, 2004

GOOD GOVERNMENT VERSUS GOOD GOVERNMENT.

By James Eugene*

The New York Times recently published a piece criticizing the New York City Board of Standards and Appeals ("BSA"). And various Council Members have been itching to have a call-up of decisions made by the BSA.

As you may be aware, our fair City has both a building code and a zoning resolution. But not every property or every project can meet every requirement of these complex laws. (For example, an oddly shaped piece of property may not allow for development due to the zoning resolution, but it may not make sense to allow the land to remain fallow.) The BSA exists to remedy these problems, allowing for reasonable building on various properties, even though a technical violation may exist. The BSA consists mainly of professionals, such as architects and engineers, who review all such applications.

However, a host of Council Members do not like the decisions being reached by the BSA. They want to have the right to review decisions of the BSA and overturn those decisions. They have even introduced legislation to this effect. Sounds logical, no?

No. These legislators have failed to learn their lessons from the past. Once, a political body had the exact same power these Council Members seek. That body was the Board of Estimate. And the Board of Estimate was constantly criticized as corrupt because, frankly, its members were looking for payoffs in order to approve various projects that the BSA had already approved! How many headlines did we read about this? How often did the Village Voice accuse various politicians of corruption? How many borough presidents, who were members of the Board of Estimate, went by the wayside in corruption scandals? And now the Council Members want to bring back the bad old days. But did the Times mention any of this? Noooooo. They just published an article critical of the BSA.

There is a simple way to fix the BSA if you don't like it. Appoint different members, but let's keep politics out of code and architectural matters.

Unfortunately, good government is often hard to define. At the Department of Buildings, the Commissioner is trying to reform an agency badly in need of reform. But every reform seems to solve a problem that is not the one that needed to be solved. Builders are complaining that the Commissioner talks the talk of reform, but the walk is another matter. Reforms indeed are taking place at the Buildings Department, but how they relate to a transparent, efficient process is beyond the builders and developers with whom I speak. And many of them are loathe to criticize because they worry about reprisals and they think the Commissioner has a very thin skin when it comes to negative press. A case in point occurred when an industry leader was quoted in Crain's and then felt obligated to state that his quotation was taken out of context in a letter the following week. However, the entire industry thinks the same thoughts as this leader's initial comment taken in its original context.

The problem with the CEO Mayor Billionaire is that he likes to give a wide berth to his Commissioners. He considers this good management. But it is one thing to appoint Commissioners and give them a wide berth. It is another thing not to monitor them. This Mayor has not axed any Commissioners (or even staff) unless he thought there was a corruption issue. Does anyone really believe he made perfect appointments? Is every Commissioner golden? Those of us who follow government know that this is not true.

To have good government you need a few things. First, the desire to have good government. This is something both the Council and the Mayor have. Second, you need a knowledge of history so you do not repeat the mistakes of the past. This is something neither the Mayor nor the Council have. Blame Ronald Lauder for term limits that have left us with no institutional memory at the City Council. And also blame the Mayor for hiring so many political novices who think that they are inventing government. Third, you need to identify the problem. This is the job for the commissioners, but few of them have identified the problems that truly plague their agencies. Fourth, you need to formulate and then implement a program. But if you fail to identify the problem, you will not solve the problem, unless, of course, your improperly conceived solution also happens to work for the actual problem (a long-shot, at best).

Our elected officials have a desire for good government. But elements two through four are missing. And unless all four elements are in sync, all you get is good government versus good government, and that, my friends, is ultimately bad government.

* James Eugene is the pseudonym of a veteran of NYC government affairs. Inside The Big Apple will appear exclusively on the Empire Page. If you want to send tips or column ideas to James Eugene, email them to jameseugene@empirepage.com.