Board hearing derails into debate over correct pastrami ratio
QUEENS, N.Y. — A routine community board hearing concerning a proposed storefront awning in Astoria took an unexpected turn last week when public testimony shifted, over the course of roughly forty minutes, from zoning setback requirements to an extended dispute over the correct meat to bread ratio at a beloved neighborhood deli two blocks from the proposed site.
The hearing, convened to review a permit application for a retail awning that board members generally agreed was uncontroversial, was derailed after a resident cited the nearby deli’s sandwich construction as evidence in an unrelated argument about neighborhood character, prompting several other attendees to weigh in with strong opinions of their own.
How It Started
According to board members present, the tangent began when a longtime resident, testifying in support of the awning application, remarked that the neighborhood’s character was best represented by institutions like the deli in question, which he described, unprompted, as having recently reduced its pastrami portions.
“He was trying to make a point about neighborhood continuity,” said community board chair Renata Volkov. “But the pastrami comment landed differently than he expected. Within about ninety seconds, four other people wanted the microphone specifically to discuss sandwich portions, and the awning was, for a while, completely forgotten.”
The Testimony
Public comment records from the meeting, which the board makes available upon request, show that at least six separate speakers addressed the deli’s sandwich construction during what was scheduled as a fifteen minute public comment period for the awning item.
One speaker, identified in the minutes only by his first name, Anthony, argued at length that the deli’s current pastrami to bread ratio represented a decline from what he called the establishment’s golden era roughly eight years earlier, an assertion that prompted audible disagreement from at least two other attendees.
“I have eaten that sandwich weekly since 2009,” Anthony testified, according to the minutes. “I am not here to relitigate an awning. I am here because someone said this deli represents our neighborhood, and if it represents our neighborhood, we should be honest that the current owner has been cutting corners, specifically on meat volume, since his father retired.”
Deli Owner’s Response
The deli’s current owner, Vasilis Kambanaris, who was not present at the hearing but was informed of the testimony afterward by several regular customers, strongly disputed the characterization.
“I did not change anything,” Kambanaris said. “Same supplier, same recipe, same scale behind the counter that my father used. If people think portions changed, I would ask them to come in and I will personally weigh a sandwich in front of them. I have offered this before. Nobody has taken me up on it, they just prefer to argue about it at a public meeting apparently.”
Kambanaris said he found it flattering, in a strange way, that his sandwich had become central to a civic discussion, even one he was not invited to participate in directly.
The Awning, Eventually
After board chair Volkov redirected the discussion back to the agenda item, the awning application was ultimately approved without opposition, a outcome board members noted took considerably longer to reach than the application’s complexity would typically warrant.
“The awning itself was never actually controversial,” Volkov said. “It was a straightforward, code compliant application. The delay was entirely due to the sandwich detour, which I want to be clear was not on any agenda and emerged entirely from public comment.”
Community Board Procedure
Community boards in New York City, which review land use applications, liquor licenses, and other local matters within their districts, generally allow public comment periods that can, as in this case, occasionally expand well beyond their originally scheduled length when attendees raise tangential concerns.
City guidelines governing community board meetings generally leave considerable discretion to board chairs in managing public comment, a discretion Volkov said she exercised as diplomatically as she could once it became clear the sandwich discussion had genuine emotional weight for several attendees.
Aftermath
Kambanaris said foot traffic at the deli increased noticeably in the days following the hearing, which he attributed, somewhat bemusedly, to the publicity generated by the dispute.
“People are coming in specifically to check the pastrami themselves,” he said. “I have had at least a dozen customers this week ask to see the scale. I show them. Every single one has left satisfied. If a zoning meeting accidentally became my best marketing campaign of the year, I am not going to complain about that.”
Volkov said future meeting agendas will include a clearer note asking commenters to stay within the scope of the item under review, though she acknowledged the note may not fully prevent a similar detour in the future.
The Scale Itself Becomes an Attraction
Kambanaris said he has since placed the deli scale prominently on the counter, partly as a transparency gesture and partly, he admits, because customers now specifically request to watch a sandwich being weighed before ordering. He said one regular has taken to photographing the scale reading every visit and posting it to a small neighborhood social media group, an informal tracking project Kambanaris finds slightly absurd but has decided not to discourage, since the readings have consistently supported his position that nothing about the sandwich has actually changed.
More From the Region
Additional reporting on local government meetings that go slightly off script can be found at Bohiney Magazine, and readers interested in a British equivalent covering parish council tangents should see The London Prat. Related coverage is available at NewsThump.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com