Randy Mastro, nominee for Corporation Counsel, defended his qualifications during a confirmation hearing, highlighting his past work and independence. City Council members expressed skepticism due to his ties to Giuliani, representing controversial clients, and concerns about impartiality. Mastro emphasized his commitment to representing all of NYC, not just the mayor. The Council is expected to vote on his nomination soon. Supporters praised his legal skills and character, while critics questioned his background and suitability for the role.
Randy Mastro, the nominee for Corporation Counsel, made a strong case for his confirmation during a recent hearing. He highlighted his experience in fighting organized crime and his pro bono work for indigent clients. Despite his impressive background, the City Council expressed skepticism, questioning his ties to former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and his representation of various clients, including landlords and anti-congestion pricing groups.
Mastro defended his independence, stating that he has a history of standing up for what is right, even in the face of powerful figures. He emphasized his commitment to representing all of New York City’s interests, not just those of Mayor Eric Adams. However, Council members remained unconvinced, citing concerns about his past legal cases and potential conflicts of interest.
The Council’s Black, Asian, and Latino Caucus, representing a significant portion of members, had already voiced opposition to Mastro’s appointment due to his lawsuits against the city and his representation of controversial clients. During the hearing, Council members raised questions about Mastro’s current legal cases, including his involvement in a lawsuit against Local Law 97 and his representation of New Jersey in a dispute over congestion tolls.
Mastro assured the Council that he would recuse himself from any ongoing cases against the city if confirmed. He also highlighted his pro bono work for the Adams administration, particularly in providing legal services to asylum seekers. Despite his efforts to address concerns and garner support, opposition to his nomination remained strong among some Council members and community leaders.
The hearing marked the culmination of a months-long public relations campaign by Mastro and the Adams administration. Reports suggested that Mastro’s potential appointment had caused tension within the administration, particularly regarding a case involving sexual assault allegations against the mayor. The Council, which now holds the power to approve the Corporation Counsel nomination, is expected to vote on Mastro’s confirmation in the near future.
Supporters of Mastro, including former Gov. David Paterson, spoke in his favor during the hearing, praising his legal skills and character. They expressed frustration over the lengthy questioning by Council members and expressed doubts about the outcome of the vote. However, critics, such as Bertha Lewis of the Black Institute, vehemently opposed Mastro’s nomination, arguing that there are better candidates for the position and questioning his past choices in legal representation.
As the debate over Mastro’s nomination continues, the City Council faces the decision of whether to approve him as Corporation Counsel. The outcome of the vote remains uncertain, with both supporters and opponents making their voices heard on the issue.
Source: TheCity.NYC
