In March 2025, residents gathered on a southern Brooklyn beach for a Community Board 15 meeting about a project at 2134 Coyle Street. They had expected ordinary affordable housing. Instead, Westhab Inc. was developing a homeless shelter.
According to the meeting minutes, residents “felt duped.”
Westhab COO Jim Coughlin clarified that he had not come to seek the community’s approval. Some residents had assumed that because they were invited to a meeting and given a microphone, the matter remained open to their approval. It did not.
[Westhab] answered a Request For Proposal (RFP) from the Department of Social Services (DSS) to bid on the site for a Homeless Shelter and was awarded the contract in 2023. They are [not] here for approval, they do not need approval. They are already approved by both DSS and DHS to move forward on the project. This drove the crowd into a frenzy because they feel they were never given a voice or say on this proposal changing from affordable housing to a homeless shelter.
At least five different functions hide inside the phrase “public meeting”:
Notification: Learn what has already been decided.
Information session: Ask questions about implementation.
Consultation: Supply information or preferences for consideration.
Advisory review: Produce a formal but nonbinding recommendation.
Decision: Exercise or directly constrain governmental authority.
They all look roughly alike. Someone presents. Residents speak. Officials nod. Minutes are taken. “Community engagement” appears in the press release. But they distribute radically different amounts of power.
Accessibility can give someone the chance to speak. Civic education tells them what speaking can change. Without that second piece, residents may mistake access for influence and experience the eventual outcome as betrayal.