Testimony of New York City Comptroller Brad Lander to the NYC Council Committee on Rules, Privileges and Elections...

Testimony of New York City Comptroller Brad Lander to the NYC Council Committee on Rules, Privileges and Elections Hearing for Advice & Consent on the Nomination of Randy Mastro as New York City Corporation Counsel

Testimony of New York City Comptroller Brad Lander

Thank you, Speaker Adams, Chair Powers, and Members of the Council's Committee on Rules, Privileges and Elections, for the opportunity to address you regarding the nomination of Randy Mastro for the position of Corporation Counsel for New York City. I testify to voice my strong opposition to this nomination based on Mr. Mastro's track record, which fails to exhibit the essential qualities required for this role-in particular the necessary respect for the independent branches of City government which the Law Department represents.

The role of Corporation Counsel is crucial in ensuring that the Law Department effectively represents and defends the interests of the City of New York and the entirety of its government. The Law Department serves as a cornerstone of our City's legal and ethical framework, engaging in complex matters that require fidelity to the best interests of our City and its agencies. This position demands not only a deep understanding of legal principles, but also an unwavering commitment to public service, transparency, integrity, and respect for the independent branches of the City's government established in the City Charter.

Under the framework provided by the Charter, the Comptroller's Office works closely with the Corporation Counsel and the Law Department to achieve essential functions for the City, including municipal finance operations to issue the bonds which finance the City's infrastructure; investment of the City's pensions funds to provide retirement security for municipal employees; review and settlement of claims against or on behalf of the City; and other actions to protect the City from risks. To perform this work, it is paramount that the partnership be rooted in respect for the independent functions of our offices, and in a shared understanding of and commitment to the public good.

Given these requirements, Mr. Mastro's history raises significant concerns about his suitability for this role. His career has been marked by a series of high-profile legal battles, often characterized by a strong partisan bent and controversial tactics. Moreover, many of his recent private practice matters have been directly adverse to the City's interests. Mastro himself has admitted he would need to recuse himself from several key issues facing the City, including, but likely not limited to, congestion pricing, Local Law 97, and any City involvement in amendments to the State's rent control laws. While attorneys are, of course, required to provide zealous representation of their clients, his role in defending the interests of major corporate entities, sometimes in opposition to the public interest both in New York City and beyond, underscores a troubling pattern of prioritizing corporate interests over the welfare of the public.

The Law Department must work collaboratively with various City agencies, stakeholders, and the public to uphold the rule of law and serve the citizens of New York City impartially. The role requires a leader who can foster positive relationships and navigate complex legal landscapes with integrity and fairness. Mr. Mastro's history does not inspire confidence that he will bring these qualities to the role.

In my personal experience as a City Council Member, Mr. Mastro exhibited disrespect bordering on contempt for the City Council. In two separate hearings that I attended, Mastro went well beyond zealous

representation of his clients to broad-brush disparagement not just of individual council members, but of the City Council as an institution. Simply put, he did not display the necessary respect for the independent legislative branch of City government, which he would be responsible for representing as Corporation Counsel. Given those experiences, I doubt his ability to serve as a neutral and fair arbiter between and among various branches and agencies of City government as required in the role of Corporation Counsel.

Appointing Randy Mastro as Corporation Counsel could potentially jeopardize the vital working relationship between the Law Department and the many entities it serves. It is imperative that we have a Corporation Counsel who embodies the highest standards of impartiality and public service. Given Mr. Mastro's record, he is not the right fit for this position. I urge the City Council to reject his nomination and insist that Mayor Adams nominate a candidate for Corporation Counsel who is not only a skilled lawyer, but also an effective collaborator and someone who has displayed the necessary respect - or, at the very least, who has not displayed disrespect - for the independent branches of City government.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

###