Tony Avella Talks Tough on Developers: ‘Some of Them Have Greed as Their Motto’
MORE
The Sit-Down
Location: In your bid for mayor, as of January, you’d raised $180,000 compared with more than $4 million by one of your potential opponents.
Mr. Avella: I consider that a virtue.
People use the term ‘long shot.’
I agree. Absolutely. I’m bucking the system; I have been since 2002. I’m the independent voice. … The real estate industry, which is the biggest contributor giving to people for higher office, they aren’t giving to me.
How many hours a week do you work?
I’m going seven days a week; 60, 70, probably, easy.
You were in the Koch and Dinkins administrations. What did you do there?
For Koch, I was his Queens liaison, and worked out of a community assistance unit, and I basically did the same thing for Dinkins, but he didn’t have the same type of setup as Koch did, but it was being the Queens rep.
And how’d you get into that?
I was a civic activist; I always wanted to get into government. I was on my community board, and I actually started my first job working for Councilman Peter Vallone—this was before he was speaker. I actually worked for him for, like, six months and then went on to the mayor’s office.
What would it take you to get traction?
It’s just a matter of getting the word out. I’m going to have to do a real grass-roots campaign. … I think the word is out there, the issues that I’ve been working on. Not as much, obviously, as I would like, but that’s what I’ve got to work on.
If you don’t get the Democratic nomination, would you run as an independent?
I don’t know.
What role do you think the real estate industry plays in city politics?
I happen to think the real estate industry plays too big a role in what happens in the city. I believe we’ve allowed them to set the agenda for planning and development, and I think nine times out of 10, they get their way. And while I recognize the need for development, and the jobs that construction creates and the need for housing, what we’ve allowed to happen is abuse of the system—it’s development at any cost.
Is the city overdeveloping?
In certain neighborhoods, yes. The interesting thing, in my opinion, is we’re not going in the neighborhoods that really want the development or where the opportunities are because we’re allowing the developers to go where the biggest bang for the buck is.
Where would those be?
In neighborhoods like Jamaica, where they really want some development.
Where else?
You could go through any low-income neighborhood where they’re in need of jobs, where the employment level is very low, where they’re actually asking for some development. But what they want is development that increases economic opportunity, provides real affordable housing—because we’re not really doing affordable housing—but maintains the character of the neighborhood. We could talk about the 125th Street rezoning.
Let’s.
Whose vision of Harlem and 125th Street is this rezoning attempting to fulfill? Certainly not the community. … We’re, in effect, in my opinion, going to destroy the very nature of the fabric of Harlem.
The city would say that 125th Street needs revitalization.
It does, to a certain extent, but not as much as they’re doing; not when you’re going to push out the existing business there.
The city has done a lot of contextual zonings that limit development in low-rise neighborhoods.
It hasn’t been enough. … There seems to be an unwritten but clearly visible Department of City Planning policy that, ‘O.K., we’ll give you a downzoning, but only if you agree to do an upzoning in the same application.’
Whatever the intentions, isn’t [gentrification] somewhat inevitable if you’re going to try to bring economic development?
No, not if you plan properly, not if you include the existing community within the plans. You can either do that by preserving a part of the community so that it doesn’t change, or you can do real affordable housing.
In general, with housing, part of the city’s plan is to build a lot of new market-rate housing, which will then bring down the average cost.
And there’s a logic to that, and I understand that, and I’m not against that. I’m just saying that it’s got to be planned better than it is, and we can’t just let the developers go hog wild wherever they want to.
In general, the real estate industry is going to be making money if you have the situation where we have, where there’s a huge demand for housing, with more people coming into the city. Is it necessarily a bad thing if the real estate industry is making money off that?
No, not at all. I just want some planned development.
As chair of the zoning subcommittee, how much power do you have over the rezonings that come through?
I used to have more than I do now.
When rezonings come before the committee, isn’t it just a matter of deferring to the local council member?
We do that in a lot of circumstances, but sometimes the council member may not be in agreement with the community.
What’s your interaction with Christine Quinn’s land-use people?
We get along fine. The problem is, the speaker determines the agenda. … Even as chair of the committee, I have no power to call a hearing on a zoning issue by myself. I can only do it if the speaker approves, and she’s not approving anything I request.
Has that relationship evolved? You said it was easier when you first came in.
[Former Council Speaker] Gifford Miller and I had our issues, because again, I was an independent person then and still am. But generally, if there was an issue, I could get an issue moved, or at least I could have a hearing. I was one of the first people, or at least I think I was one of the first people, from Queens to support Christine. … You would never know that in the way she treats me.
Right now we don’t talk—there’s no talk between the two of us. It started going downhill when I opposed the pay raise, and I tried to lead a floor fight against it, and now I don’t get the right to do any hearing, I have to fight for any budget request I do … and none of my legislation is moving ahead.
Generally, with development restrictions, isn’t there something to be said that new restrictions for the real estate industry would slow the economy?
I would never want to do that. I think that the reforms we’re talking about would just correct the abuses. It’s like the pendulum has swung too far in the real estate sector, we’ve just got to swing it back. … We just want to stop the abuses, and put in some reforms and do proper planning. Unfortunately, the real estate industry doesn’t want any reforms, so they take this as we’re the great demons.
Do you think that they’re the great demons?
Some of them are—some of them certainly have greed as their motto.
Greed, or profit?
Greed. It’s more than just profit.
Copyright © 2008 The New York Observer. All rights reserved.
