City Council Special Election Candidates Wrestle with Development, Preservation

The special election for City Council District 3 will be held on April 28, and four prominent candidates—Leslie Boghosian Murphy, Layla Law-Gisiko, Carl Wilson, and Lindsay Boylan—are in the running to replace Erik Bottcher, who has hopped to New York State Senate. Early voting takes place from April 18 to April 26.

All four candidates have lengthy resumes when it comes to local or citywide civic work. Boghosian Murphy is the current chair of Community Board 4. Law-Gisiko is a prominent community activist and preservationist advocate. Wilson is Bottcher’s former chief of staff.

Boylan, the first woman to accuse former Gov. Andrew Cuomo of sexual harassment, has an extensive background in urban planning and was once the chief of staff at the Economic Development Corporation.

Still, where the candidates stand on a key local flashpoint, which pits support for landmarks preservation against support for affordable housing development, is complicated.

A spokesperson for Boghosian Murphy captured the conflicted essence of the debate when, asked for comment by Chelsea News, she said that she “doesn’t see preservation and development as opposing forces, we need both, done thoughtfully.”

Carl Wilson told Chelsea News much the same thing, saying that “both” preservation and development should be approached “responsibly and thoughtfully.”

Indeed, the Chelsea Reform Democratic Club and Village Preservation hosted two forums that centered heavily on this question earlier this year, which were attended by all four jockeying competitors.

Village Preservation, a group that advocates for the preservation and strengthening of local landmarks protections, is led by Andrew Berman.

Berman has recently organized the fight to save the Tony Dapolito Recreation Center, a historic and decrepit Clarkson Street building, from demolition; the NYC Parks Dept. has argued that repairs are too expensive, and wants to site new recreational facilities in a planned residential tower nearby at 388 Hudson.

In response to a Village Preservation questionnaire that accompanied the group’s forum, held on March 10, all candidates made clear their striking alignment on the issue of the Tony Dapolito Center’s fate: they oppose the use of city funds to demolish the building.

The candidates were also adamant that the existing building, which has been closed to the public since 2020, must be properly restored. Carl Wilson wrote that he believes that “the current facility does not fully meet the needs of the local community,” and “must be revamped.”

Law-Gisiko, similarly, wrote that she’d like to see the recreation center “repaired, restored, modernized, and reopened.” Boghosian Murphy used almost the exact same language, while Boylan simply responded “yes and yes” to the question of whether it should be preserved and reopened.

In the questionnaire and at the forum itself, the candidates also showed alignment on what they expect out of any development at 388 Hudson, which would extend to 35 stories tall and could cost around $165 million to build.

Namely, they wanted assurances that a slew of affordable units set to be provided by the building would be “permanently affordable,” with Wilson telling Berman that he’d use the city’s zoning procedures to negotiate toward such an outcome.

Wilson outright stated that “the design [at 388 Hudson] does not look good,” adding that he didn’t understand “why we can’t design things that look like the West Village.”

Such development of affordable housing dominated the conversation at the Reform Club’s late January forum, where it sat alongside additional questions on preservationist priorities.

“I don’t think there is one solution to the housing crisis,” Boghosian Murphy said then. “What I think is very troubling is...that if you look at the list of affordable housing that’s been created specifically in our district...almost all of the units are studios and one bedrooms. We need family and working-class units, period.”

Boylan said that there was a “drastic need for affordability” that called for a “multi-pronged approach,” which would include measures such as “freeing up projects on city land.”

The Reform Club also focused heavily on another prominent preservationist flashpoint: the proposed demolition of the NYCHA complexes known as the Elliott-Chelsea and Fulton Houses, in order to make way for a reconstituted, mixed-use development that would include private development.

In accompanying questionnaires, the candidates laid out where they stood on the question, although Law-Gisiko has long since made her position clear by supporting a lawsuit that has earned a temporary stay on any demolition.

“I will fight to ensure that any development plan, including a proposal that is driven by resident needs, not developer profits,” Boylan wrote.

Boghosian Murphy wrote that the issue was not about “demo or no demo,” but rather about the “very slippery slope” of public housing being “controlled by outside, for-profit interests.”

Meanwhile, Wilson expressed ambiguity toward the proposed redevelopment, writing that “a rebuilding plan can only be justified if it demonstrably delivers better, safer housing for tenants and strengthens the long-term public mission of NYCHA.”

Other live-wire issues, such as whether the candidates support a contentious “security perimeter” protest bill for houses of worship that recently passed City Council, will undoubtedly face any candidate that wins the election. The bill currently sits on Mayor Mamdani’s desk.

Wilson told Chelsea News that he supports the perimeter bill, while Boghosian Murphy said that “any approach must be carefully crafted so that it prevents intimidation, without giving overly broad discretion or unintentionally restricting lawful protest.”