Hollow Compliance: How RIOC Undermines the Spirit of New York’s Open Meetings Law
RIOC repeatedly skirts the Open Meetings Law—merging required committees, announcing meetings at the last minute, and approving decisions already made behind closed doors.
While Eleanor is here to educate and entertain you—gently unraveling the storylines hidden in Roosevelt Island’s governance—I’m just here to help us all understand how government works. And, more importantly, how and when it doesn’t.
In a recent piece, Pier Pressure: When Leadership Sinks, Eleanor invites you into a public meeting so thinly structured, it leaves you wondering whether the room ever had oxygen in the first place. No tension. No deliberation. No apparent purpose. But make no mistake—this is the pattern, not the exception.
Why This Topic Matters
Government meetings are not formalities. They are the public’s window into decision-making. The only one, in many cases. And when that window is fogged up with procedural haze, or worse—painted over entirely—we lose something fundamental: the ability to understand and influence the forces that govern our daily lives.
On Roosevelt Island, we’re watching what happens when the bare minimum becomes the standard. When transparency is performed, not practiced. And when public bodies comply with the letter of the law while gutting its spirit.
Let’s start by understanding what that law is.
What Is New York’s Open Meetings Law?
The Open Meetings Law (Public Officers Law, Article 7) was enacted in 1976 to ensure that the work of government agencies is conducted openly, and that citizens can observe and participate meaningfully in the democratic process.
It requires:
Advance public notice of meetings
Accessibility to the public, either in person or via live stream
Accurate minutes and records
Discussion of public business to happen in public, not in private
The law exists not to slow government down but to make it accountable.
Who Must Follow It?
Virtually every public body in New York State. That includes:
City councils and town boards
School boards
State agencies and commissions
Authorities like the MTA and yes—RIOC
Committees and subcommittees, if they consist of a quorum of members or conduct public business
If they’re doing the public’s work, they must do it in the public’s view.
What Happens When It’s Violated?
There are consequences—but they lack teeth:
A court can invalidate actions taken in violation
A judge may compel future compliance
In rare cases, attorney’s fees may be awarded to a successful petitioner
But legal action is rarely pursued, and almost never successful unless someone can show direct financial harm. One rare example: In Smith v. Town of Clarkstown, a court ruled that a town board violated the Open Meetings Law by holding budget discussions in executive session, and the court invalidated the resulting actions. But such victories are the exception, not the rule.
In practice, enforcement depends on:
Public vigilance and press scrutiny
Elected officials who demand accountability
RIOC board members who value transparency
Without those three forces in place, the law is more suggestion than safeguard.
RIOC’s Structure—And Its Legal Duty
The Roosevelt Island Operating Corporation (RIOC) is a New York State Public Benefit Corporation, created under the Urban Development Corporation Act.
RIOC’s board members are appointed by the Governor. It is not a city agency, but a state-chartered entity with unique power over our island.
It is, beyond dispute, subject to the Open Meetings Law.
RIOC maintains several standing committees:
Governance Committee (legally required)
Audit Committee (legally required)
Finance Committee (legally required)
Operations Advisory Committee (advisory)
Real Estate Development Advisory Committee (REDAC) (advisory)
However, RIOC currently maintains only one committee to serve the functions of both Audit and Finance, claiming they are "merged." While this may pass internal rationale, it falls into a legal gray zone given that both are individually required under the law—and, as mentioned, lack of enforcement means the issue persists unchallenged.
Importantly, Howard Polivy, who plays a central role in off-record leadership decisions, chairs three of these committees: Audit/Finance and REDAC. This consolidation of control undermines the spirit of internal checks and balances.
It’s also worth noting that for years, the Governance Committee—arguably the most important of them all—did not operate at all. We’ll return to that disturbing lapse in a future article.
Where It Falls Apart
In theory, these committees are supposed to vet proposals, debate concerns, and offer guidance to the full board. But in practice?
Meetings are scheduled at the last minute, with just enough notice to meet the law’s minimums.
Agendas are often vague or posted with too little lead time for the public to engage.
Public participation is functionally discouraged through timing and format.
Worst of all, meetings are devoid of debate. Proposals are nodded through with barely a sentence spoken.
This is not accidental. Multiple sources familiar with RIOC’s inner workings have confirmed that real decisions are made privately, often between Aduit Chair Howard Polivy and Board Chair RuthAnne Visnauskas, DHCR Commissioner of the State of New York.
By the time the public and most of the board members hears about a matter, it is often already decided. In many cases, already executed.
What remains is a ritual of compliance—a husk of a process meant to satisfy legal optics, not public need.
Why It Should Concern You
This isn’t just about Roosevelt Island. It’s about how public institutions across New York learn to perform transparency without embodying it.
The Open Meetings Law was meant to create access. What we’re witnessing is hollow compliance: a performance of legality that leaves residents uninformed, uninvolved, and ultimately unheard.
If we allow that to stand, we forfeit more than our right to know. We forfeit the premise that government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed.
What You Can Do
Ask RIOC: Why do committee meetings lack real debate? Why are decisions publicized only after they’ve been made?
Reach out to your elected officials: Demand oversight and reforms to strengthen transparency.
Attend meetings, even the boring ones: Your presence is pressure.
Support watchdog journalism: We’re committed to staying in the room—even when they wish we wouldn’t.
what are analogous local public bodies that have better compliance with the open meetings law and just better norms?
1) not to excuse RIOC's behavior, but is this just a more systemic problem with overall lack of enforcement (and/or norms across city/state)?
2) are there any good practices/behaviors we can borrow from more successfully operating meeting series?
Quiet outrage is what keeps this failed system running smoothly. We need loud, lunatic outrage. Residents need to take back their government or, at least, THEY NEED TO BE ANNOYING. It's hard to be annoying in public. It's hard to ask the same question over and over until you are escorted out of the meeting. Your children will be mortified. What if we all did this together, as an annoying group? What if we were so annoying, at every meeting, that they escorted all of us out. And a fair press, took pictures and publicized the event, showing the citizens out in the cold and the governing body inside all alone.