On June 16, the New York City Council’s Committee on Governmental Operations, State & Federal Legislation held a hearing on Int 1065_2024. This bill would limit the term of community board district managers to four years, with the possibility of re-appointment, and provide borough presidents with the power to remove district managers at will.
Good morning, Chairman Lincoln Restler, Committee Members, and attendees:
I am Darrell Sims; President of the New York City Managerial Employees Association (MEA) and to testify with me is Alice Wong, MEA Executive Director. We would like to thank the Committee for providing us with the opportunity to provide testimony. The MEA is the professional organization that advocates for civil service rights and work / life improvements for over 16,000 New York City managerial and confidential employees (managers). Managers are excluded from collective bargaining with the City of New York pursuant to the New York State Taylor Law. Recognized by the City administration since our inception in 1968, we are the only organization who represents non-union municipal employees. Our membership extends to every City agency and authority. Please visit our website for further information about us at www.nycmea.org.
Based on experience and concerns expressed by District Managers who are MEA members, the following is our position regarding Intro 1065 of 2024.
The New York City Managerial Employees Association objects to the proposed amendment Intro 1065 to Section 1, Subdivision f, Section 2800 of the New York City Charter which would change the terms of employment for all fifty-nine apolitical District Manager positions in New York City. Intro 1065 lacks justification for imposing a four-year renewable term limit on District Managers and empowering the five borough presidents with the authority to terminate employment of District Managers, although they are not involved in the hiring procedure. There are no details delineating reasons for termination of District Managers by borough presidents. By providing the borough presidents with this authority, it creates the opportunity for political abuse of power and intimidation of District Managers. Currently, each community board is responsible for hiring and terminating the employment of District Managers which appropriately separates the community board from the borough president and eliminates potential conflict.
The terms of employment proposed in Intro 1065 are demoralizing to District Managers because the amendment is undesirable to current District Managers and will possibly have a detrimental impact on their employment. There appears to be an implied disregard for District Managers’ employment by destabilizing their job security. Most managers would not be interested in becoming a District Manager if their employment could be terminated in four years and by a borough president who did not hire them.
District managers provide institutional knowledge and stability to ensure continuity of government services for the community districts and community boards in which they serve. The ten-year term limit for community board members further justifies the necessity to maintain employment stability and consistency for District Managers. Intro 1065 will adversely affect the employment retention of District Managers. It will also have a negative effect on the recruitment of District Managers because most applicants for civil service employment are searching for job security without the potential of being terminated after only four years of service.
The MEA recommends that Intro 1065 be reconsidered by the City Council because of its adverse effect on the employment of District Managers and the community boards for which they serve.
Respectfully submitted,
Darrell L. Sims Alice Wong
President Executive Director
