Council Member Joann Ariola has defended her decision to support a vote overriding Mayor Eric Adams’ veto of legislation decriminalizing illegal street vending amid fierce criticism from City Hall, describing her vote as a “protest” against what she described as previous mayoral inaction on the issue.
Ariola had initially voted against Intro 47-B, sponsored by Council Member Shekar Krishnan, which removes all misdemeanor criminal penalties for general vendors and mobile food vendors. Instead, who operate without a license could be subject to a violation and a fine or a civil penalty. Vendors who violate any other street vending laws would be subject to a civil penalty.
The Council passed the legislation by a 40-7 majority at the end of June before Adams vetoed the bill at the end of July, requiring the Council to provide a two-thirds majority – or 34 votes in order to override the veto.
‘Blindsided’
In a vote on Sept. 10, the Council voted 35-9 in favor of the override, with Ariola’s vote coming toward the end of the vote when the outcome remained unclear. First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro alleged that Council Member Susan Zhuang, who voted just before Ariola, would have abstained had Ariola voted against the override, leaving the Council short of the two-thirds majority required.
Zhuang has not yet returned a request for comment.
Mastro said City Hall was “shocked” and blindsided” by Ariola’s vote in favor of the override, stating that the Adams Administration had expected her to vote against the legislation again.
“I thought she was supposed to be head of the Republican caucus and not beholden to the Democratic speaker,” Mastro said.
He described the bill as “bad legislation,” adding that it “effectively legalizes illegal street vending” under the guise of decriminalization.
Mastro further argued that the legislation “encourages” illegal street vending by eliminating significant criminal fines in place of smaller civil penalties and said the legislation places “law-abiding” business owners at a disadvantage.
“That’s not right to do to the many law-abiding small businesses and licensed vendors who have to comply with the law, who have to meet all of the public health and public safety standards applicable to their businesses and who pay their taxes,” Mastro said. “This is unfair competition that puts those legitimate businesses and licensed vendors operating legally at risk.”
‘Major issues’
Ariola, however, defended her decision to support the veto override, accusing the Adams Administration of vetoing the legislation as a “campaign stunt.”
She said she had been pleading with City Hall to enforce the law against illegal vendors in her district for the past three-and-a-half years, adding that she had hardly seen “any major sweeps or crackdowns” in that spell.
“But now that it’s election time, suddenly the Mayor is very concerned about the issue. This is little more than a campaign stunt, and I have deep reservations about the administration using the power of the veto simply to further their own ambitions,” Ariola said in a statement.
Speaking during the Council vote, Ariola also hit out at Adams for irresponsibly using veto power as a campaign tactic ahead of the November general election.
“While I strongly believe that the veto needs to remain in place, I also believe that this administration has used it more to score political points in an election year than to actually help the people who live and work in this city,” Ariola said during the Council vote.
In a statement, she described her vote as a protest vote against “mayoral inaction and egotism.”
“In my own district we’ve had major issues with vendors, and I’ve consistently plead for help, only for the administration to refuse to utilize the enforcement that was in place,” Ariola said in a statement. “Right outside of City Hall, too, we had a ton of illegal vendors set up for years, but all of a sudden there is a crackdown the day of the vote? This is all for election time optics and nothing else.”
She also accused the Mayor of “trying to get his name in the papers” and said the NYPD and DSNY will still retain the ability to fine illegal vendors under the new legislation. She noted that law enforcement will also have the power to confiscate and remove merchandise.
“This hits illegal vendors in the pocket where it hurts the most,” Ariola said. “If the Mayor were truly serious about this issue, and wasn’t just trying to get his name in the papers, he would have proposed stricter regulations on vending locations and tougher fines and we could roll out a real crack down on our well-known trouble spots with the tools currently available. I won’t be holding my breath, waiting for that to happen.”
Mastro, however, described Ariola’s explanation as “nonsensical.”
“She purports to stand up for cracking down on illegal vending by switching her vote to essentially legalize illegal vending,” Mastro said. “That makes no sense at all.”
Meanwhile, Council Member Robert Holden, who co-chairs the Council’s Common Sense Caucus alongside Ariola, blasted Ariola for flipping on the issue.
Holden described Ariola’s vote as “egregious” and accused her of changing her vote only after Council Speaker Adrienne Adams held up the vote “mid-stream” and approached Ariola.
“It was a despicable display by a minority leader,” Holden said. “I’ve never seen that. It’s disgusting.”
Holden also accused Ariola of going against the Common Sense Caucus “once too often,” adding that her vote had undermined the caucus.
He described Ariola’s statement explaining her change of heart as a “word salad” and said he did not believe that her vote was a protest against the Adams Administration.
“It doesn’t remotely make sense,” Holden said. “If you’re doing a protest vote by going along with the Speaker and decriminalizing it (illegal vending)… that’s crazy.”
He said he would be open to removing Ariola from the caucus but said he is not sure if it is worth the effort, stating that he is entering his final months as Council Member for District 30.
‘Protecting our residents’
Some lawmakers who had voted in favor of the original legislation, including Bronx Council Member Rafael Salamanca, voted against the veto during last week’s vote.
Salamanca has not yet returned a request for comment, but Mastro insisted that lawmakers had changed their votes to oppose the veto because they “didn’t understand what the bill actually provided for in the first place.”
“They didn’t realize that in decriminalizing illegal vending, that essentially meant there would be no consequence for illegal vending,” Mastro said, adding that proposed civil fines are miniscule in comparison to the current criminal penalties.
Krishnan, meanwhile, said the legislation was a major victory for New York City’s immigrant population, stating that the law protects vendors from potential jail time and “possible immigration consequences.”
“The City Council will protect immigrants from intimidation and fear, from the horrifying conditions of 26 Federal Plaza, and from Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda,” Krishnan said in a statement. “As Trump beefs up ICE and deploys the National Guard to our cities, we will stand up for our communities.”
Council Speaker Adams said the Council was “protecting our residents from Trump Administration abuses” by overriding the veto.
Mastro, however, contested this argument and said no street vendors have faced immigration problems when issued a criminal summons for illegal street vending. He further alleged that lawmakers had used “false arguments” to advance the legislation.
“They simply clouded the real issue here, which was that illegal pending was effectively being legalized through the back door,” Mastro said.
Holden described the legislation would impact quality of life in New York City by “promoting” illegal vendors.
“Making it a civil penalty will essentially encourage more and more people to break the law… and when they sell food, that’s particularly disturbing because it could affect public health,” Holden said.
The Council also override another Adams veto on legislation requiring third-party app companies, such as Instacart, to pay grocery delivery workers a minimum wage of $21.44 per hour. That legislation, sponsored by Brooklyn Council Member Jennifer Gutiérrez, extends the same wage and workplace protections that food delivery workers currently enjoy to grocery delivery workers.
“The Council’s override of the Mayor’s senseless vetoes enact these laws that advance and protect the working people of our city,” Speaker Adams said in a statement.
Gutiérrez, meanwhile, said Adams’s vetoes were a “slap in the face” to working-class New Yorkers.
“These bills were designed to protect the very delivery workers his own administration once claimed they wanted to help. That City Hall is now wasting energy trying to block its own idea is as cynical as it gets,” Gutiérrez said.
