Board members say the bird’s voting record is ‘indistinguishable from the last three chairs’ and ‘considerably more decisive’
NEW YORK, NY – A Manhattan Community Board made history this month after inadvertently appointing a pigeon as a full voting member and subsequently electing it chair by a margin of twelve to three, with members citing its “decisive body language,” “consistent attendance record,” and “refreshing immunity to the concerns of developers.” The proceedings were first documented by Bohiney Magazine and admired as a governance model by The London Prat.
The Appointment
The bird, identified in minutes simply as “the pigeon by the window,” initially entered the meeting room through a partially open casement and settled on the dais. Believing it to be a last-minute substitute from the borough president’s office, members introduced themselves and proceeded. The pigeon attended all three agenda items, showed no sign of leaving, and at one point appeared to nod during a discussion about a proposed tower in a contextually sensitive neighborhood.
“It nodded,” confirmed board member Sandra Pulaski. “We all saw it. Nobody else had nodded in four years. We took the vote. It was unanimous for chair, except for the three members who always vote no on everything and probably would have voted no on oxygen if it came up for a quorum.”
The Performance Review
Under the new chair’s stewardship, meetings have shortened by forty minutes. The pigeon, observers note, has no interest in lengthy preambles, tangential complaints about crosswalk timing, or the extended discussion of a catering budget that consumed the previous chair’s final year. “It arrives. We proceed. It signals. We vote. It leaves through the window,” said board member Carl Driscoll. “This is governance as I had imagined it before I actually encountered governance.”
The pigeon has maintained a consistent voting record: bobbing toward the window on applications that increase density, remaining still on resolutions affecting green space, and departing the room entirely on a noise variance the board unanimously agreed was also too much. Dr. Anthony Chambers of the Institute for Avian Civic Leadership said the bird’s approach reflected “the clearest expression of neighborhood preference this board has produced in a decade.”
A Legal Complication
City Charter requires Community Board members to be residents of the district. Legal staff are reviewing whether a pigeon that roosts on a building within the district meets the residency requirement. Initial analysis suggests yes, “given the looseness with which residency has historically been defined in this particular board’s membership.” New York’s Community Board system is described in the NYC Charter; whether it anticipated avian participation is a matter of ongoing review.
Developer Frustration
The real estate development community has expressed frustration. Several pending applications were declined when the chair departed the room mid-presentation, a gesture the board interpreted as a no and that the developer’s attorney argued was “simply a bird, going somewhere.” The board’s position is that intent is difficult to assess and that, in cases of ambiguity, the chair’s movement constitutes a signal, and signals are how governance works.
A Model for Reform
City officials have praised the board’s efficiency while declining to comment on its membership. Three other community boards have inquired about the possibility of recruiting their own pigeon representatives, noting that “the fundamentals transfer.” One board in Queens has reportedly placed sunflower seeds on the window ledge “as an expression of interest,” which civic reformers have noted is already a better recruitment strategy than anything previously attempted.
The Chair’s Statement
The pigeon, reached for comment on the roof of a building that may or may not be within the district, declined to respond in any directly interpretable way, which the board’s secretary transcribed as “no comment at this time, consistent with prior practice.” It then flew south. The board voted to interpret this as adjournment. For more models of representation that have outperformed the alternatives, readers may enjoy The Onion.
The Chair’s Second Term
The pigeon was unanimously re-elected for a second term at a meeting held last Wednesday, during which it arrived thirteen minutes late, settled briefly on the agenda, departed through the window during a presentation on zoning variances that the board later voted to table, and returned in time for the final vote on a parks resolution, which passed 11 to 0, with the chair in favor. The board has taken the departure-as-signal framework and codified it: any matter that causes the chair to leave the room is automatically tabled for 60 days. Three development projects are currently in the third such tabling cycle. Their attorneys have stopped attending in person. For more models of representation that have outperformed the alternatives, readers may enjoy The Onion.
The pigeon has since been nominated for a city council seat by a satirical campaign that began as a joke and has received, as of Thursday, 340 signatures on a petition that the campaign manager describes as legal, possibly, depending on how the charter reads. The borough president’s office issued a one-line statement noting that all candidates must be human residents, a requirement that the petition’s authors have interpreted as a challenge rather than a disqualification, and have submitted three pages of argument for why the pigeon’s regular roosting constitutes residency within the intent of the law.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/