Team Adams likens Council bill to Tamanny redux; critics cry baloney
Top officials in Mayor Adams’ administration defended his stance that the City Council should not be granted the power to approve many mayoral appointments — arguing that doing so would mark a return to the days of political patronage that defined the Tammany Hall era — a claim that drew immediate sharp rebukes.
Lisa Zornberg, Adams’ chief City Hall counsel, described the Council bill as “highly problematic,” “deeply misguided” and running “against the grain of what has been systematic in New York City for 140 years.”
“The bill proposes that the City Council should have the final word, that they should have the power to confirm candidates for the executive administration,” she said during a City Hall press conference. “That was tried in New York City in the 1800s. You know who loved it? Tammany Hall loved it.”
The legislation, if enacted, would require that the Council give “advice and consent” on mayoral appointees to lead city agencies. A similar process already exists, but on a much more limited basis.
Tammany Hall, a political machine that dominated city politics during the 1800s, became synonymous with political corruption over the years.
“Since 1884, the law was changed to give the mayor of New York City sole discretion to appoint and to be held responsible for the performance — good or bad — of the heads of agencies,” Zornberg said. “The same issues that motivated that change in 1884 are ever present now.”
Shirley Limongi, a spokeswoman for the City Council, suggested Team Adams look inward at its own appointments when making references to political patronage.
“It’s interesting that this administration would bring up Tammany Hall when there have been major ethical and qualifications questions raised about many of its appointments,” Limongi said. “Advice and consent is fundamentally a protection against political loyalty and patronage determining appointments instead of a person’s qualifications and ethics.”
Adams’ appointments that have raised hackles include tapping his brother Bernard for a $210,000 a year post, which he eventually reduced to $1 over conflicts of interests concerns; picking Phil Banks as deputy mayor years after Banks was named as an unindicted co-conspirator amid a corruption probe; and his selection of top aide Tim Pearson, who is now facing a city Department of Investigation probe.
Eric Lane, who presided over the city’s Charter Revision Commission in the late 1980s, also disagreed with Zornberg’s framing of the issue.
“The Council’s bill is totally consistent with the notion of checks and balances,” he said. “And checks are a good idea.”
