Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso has been a vocal advocate for increasing housing in New York City, but his appointee to the City Planning Commission, Juan Osorio, has consistently voted against major housing proposals.
Osorio was the only commissioner to oppose the City of Yes for Economic Opportunity last year. He also voted against the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity six months later, which was initially expected to create 110,000 homes before being reduced by the City Council to 82,000.
This year, Osorio voted no on rezonings in Atlantic Avenue (Brooklyn), Midtown South (Manhattan), and downtown Jamaica (Queens). These three projects are anticipated to lead to 27,000 new homes and passed with a combined vote of 33-5. Only Leah Goodridge, appointed by Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, joined Osorio in opposition.
Osorio did support the Bronx Metro-North Station Area rezoning, projected to add 7,000 units. Otherwise, he has largely opposed efforts intended to expand housing stock.
During commission meetings, Osorio called for comprehensive impact studies and emphasized concerns about displacing manufacturing jobs and rent affordability. For example, he opposed the Midtown South rezoning because of a worst-case scenario estimate that it could displace 5,300 jobs from the Garment District. However, an environmental review concluded this displacement would be insignificant given Manhattan’s workforce size.
“But these are New Yorkers,” Osorio said regarding those potentially displaced workers. “who rely on these jobs to be able to afford housing in the city.”
Historically, manufacturing zoning protections have not prevented job losses as industries changed over time. Despite past policies preserving such zones in places like the Garment District or broader industrial areas pre-Bloomberg administration—when manufacturing jobs dropped from one million to just over 50,000 today—rezonings are now seen as necessary for economic evolution.
Reynoso agrees with Osorio on maintaining some industrial policy but argues more residential construction is needed across Brooklyn neighborhoods that have not built significant new housing since 1968. Still, he acknowledges political challenges make upzoning difficult outside core development areas.
The borough president supported initiatives like City of Yes and suggested its goals should be expanded rather than limited by rent caps: “We need to be realistic about what City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is and what it is not,” Reynoso said last year. “It is not an affordability strategy.”
Osorio cited lack of affordability mandates as his reason for voting against certain measures—even when they included requirements under Mandatory Inclusionary Housing policies—arguing they did not go far enough.
When asked whether Osorio had diverged from his agenda, Reynoso stated that his appointees act independently: “I don’t have any puppets,” he said. “The mayor’s appointees are all rubber stampers. What Osorio is doing is making the Department of City Planning work. He’s challenging them to do better.”
Reynoso further commented on changing attitudes among progressives: “The progressives are leading the pro-housing movement,” he said. “The progressives used to be the problem. They were scared of gentrification. But we got new data.”
Despite this shift in rhetoric at leadership levels and calls from various authors urging liberals to focus on outcomes rather than process or protectionism—including arguments outlined by Marc Dunkelman—the debate continues over how best to balance affordable housing needs with other priorities.
