City Council’s Last-Minute Move to Block Housing Measures Sparks Outrage

The executive director of the city Charter Revision Commission has condemned a recent scheme by the City Council and Brooklyn politician Frank Seddio to prevent key pro-housing proposals from appearing on the November ballot. The plan, which was apparently thwarted after information leaked, involved efforts to invalidate the measures by claiming they contained confusing language.

These proposals aimed to give mayors more control over housing development by reducing the unofficial veto power that individual councilmembers currently hold over rezoning and related decisions in their districts.

The City Council, which appoints members to the Board of Elections (BOE) through nominations from both Democratic and Republican party leaders, seemingly believed the Board would execute its directives. However, legally, the BOE’s role is limited to simply placing charter revision questions on the ballot—a process known as a “ministerial duty” rather than a discretionary power.

Only days before the ballot certification deadline, Seddio raised a concern about the clarity of the language, effectively attempting to delay or derail the measures, and possibly push the BOE into removing them altogether. This last-minute maneuver is viewed as an unethical attempt to undermine Mayor Eric Adams’ authority, who can present charter amendments directly to voters.

Remarkably, the measures were certified by the City Clerk—another appointment by the council—without raising any issues about the language, paving the way for their inclusion on the ballot. Only when the deadline was imminent did Seddio object, raising questions about the timing and motivation behind the move.

Such tactics are considered lawless and cowardly by critics, who see them as an attempt to manipulate the democratic process. Seddio’s recent history includes over 500 lawsuits related to auto insurance on behalf of a Brooklyn-based physician with a record of insurance-fraud allegations, adding to concerns about his motives.

While public pressure might have already disrupted this scheme, the final outcome depends on the BOE’s upcoming vote. Those who conspired to block the measures now face scrutiny and accountability for undermining their sworn duties.