I assume from this statement that Ken Diamondstone plans to challenge Yassky for the 33rd City Council seat. Here is Ken's statement:

Brooklyn Council Candidate Ken Diamondstone's Statement on David Yassky's "Yes" Vote on a Legislative Change to Term Limits

COUNCILMAN DAVID YASSKY BETRAYS VOTERS

On October 23rd, David Yassky finally revealed what many who live in the 33rd Council District suspected all along. By voting "yes" on a legislative change to the term limits law, Yassky has once again demonstrated that while he plays at being a progressive working for the people, the real reason he is in office is to serve his own self-interest.

These past few weeks have been the most disgraceful chapter in Yassky's seven years in office. His alleged indecision on extending term limits made it clear that David Yassky lacks both courage and conviction. He didn't have the guts to stand before the residents of the 33rd Council District to admit his plan to sell them out, so he could treat himself to four more years of the same at City Hall.

But now the whole City knows how Yassky stands. It's the same way he stood on Atlantic Yards, where he spent years avoiding taking a position, until he finally figured out which side best suited his self-interest. It's the same way he hid on the sidelines about the rezoning of the Brooklyn Law School site. It's the same way he now stands on luxury housing in Brooklyn Bridge Park.

Yassky's vote to extend term limits – notably, the 26th and deciding vote on the legislation – proves that the amendment he put forth calling for a public referendum was nothing more than a cynical face-saving gesture worked out as a backroom deal.

Yassky's real intention was always to serve another four years in office. By doing an end run around two referenda which affirmed the people's strong stance on limiting the City's elected official to two terms, Yassky clearly demonstrated that he believes his own interests trump the voice of the voters.

Once again the people have been shortchanged by David Yassky, a politician who constantly maneuvers among special interests, developers, and powerbrokers, promoting his own personal ambition by buying into theirs.

I am hearing Jo Anne Simon also express "disappointment" in Yassky's decision and in her case she is still considering her options. I will say that people I have talked to have expressed a GREATER willingness to vote for Jo Anne Simon if she is running against Yassky than if Yassky is not in the picture, Yassky's own protege has dropped out already (of course) and I predict that negotiations that probably went on before Yassky made his decision to support the Bloomberg Putsch means the Vito Lopez/Michael Tobman candidate will withdraw.

I will have more to write about the shifting sands of Brooklyn and NYC politics, but I think there is an emerging Schumer/Weiner/WFP alliance that is aiming to be the biggest player in the game and I think people like Yassky and Lopez are likely to be on the losing end of it...maybe. I also see players like Bill de Blasio and Eric Adams sizing up which side they want to play on. I can't say I eye a Schumer/Weiner/WFP machine with unmitigated excitement...but I certainly see them as possibly cleaning things up a bit around here. The most interesting thing is that it could well be that the first big battle (small skirmishes have already erupted in the Connor/Squadron fight and the term limits fight) may be the likes of Bloomberg, Yassky, Markowitz and Recchia being possible first targets. I may not side with a Schumer/Weiner/WFP faction in all races, but I suspect that the candidates backed by such an alliance will have a good shot at winning even against incumbents. And I predict Michael Bouldin will eagerly side with the new alliance (shall we call them the Rebel Alliance fighting Emperor Bloomberg and Darth Lopez...with Markowitz inevitably as Jabba the Hutt?). It may be 2009 will be more interesting now that Bloomberg has dissolved the Senate and declared himself Emperor.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

| | | | | | | |