The Brooklyn Democratic Party’s chaotic, hours-delayed organizational meeting descended into chaos on Wednesday, beset with tech issues, incongruous vote counts and all-out shouting matches.
It was the latest battle in a war over party leadership fought by sitting chair Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn and a group of reformers aligned with New Kings Democrats.
Reformers won a majority of district leader seats in the June primary election to oust Bichotte Hermelyn in favor of longtime district leader Julio Peña III. That vote was expected to take place at the organizational meeting.
Last month, Bichotte Hermelyn changed party rules to expand the party’s executive committee, nullifying the reformers’ majority. The new rules were approved in a last-minute meeting of the outgoing executive committee, including several lame-duck members who had not been re-elected to their positions.
Dozens of party members rallied against Bichotte Hermelyn’s rule changes ahead of the meeting. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann
A state Supreme Court judge last week tossed the new rules, ruling the August executive committee vote was “improper” under state election law and the party’s own bylaws. But Bichotte Hermelyn appealed the decision, and the appellate court issued a temporary stay that halted the lower court’s ruling — meaning the new rules were in effect for Wednesday’s meeting.
Reformers and their supporters decried Bichotte Hermelyn’s actions at a pre-meeting rally on Wednesday morning.
“Voters made a very clear choice in the June primary election, and instead of honoring that election, they’re choosing to keep themselves in power and change the rules in the last minute so that they can handpick their successor,” Peña said. “That is not democracy. That is authoritarianism.”
District Leader Julio Peña III, the reformers’ pick for executive committee chair. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann
Public advocate Jumaane Williams called the move a “power grab,” while Council Member Sandy Nurse — who is also a newly-elected district leader — said it was “exhausting, embarrassing, and just such a waste of time that we have to be out here doing this kind of effort to just do what the Brooklyn voters voted for.”
New Kings Democrats president Tony Melone warned that Bichotte Hermelyn might “try to reelect herself today using additional votes added to the executive committee, which is exactly what the Supreme Court said was illegal.”
But the party ran out of time before it could elect a new party chair.
‘The level of disorganization is remarkable’
The organizational meeting had been slated to begin at City Tech in Downtown Brooklyn at 10 a.m. But, half an hour after start time, there was a long line of people outside, waiting to get through security. Inside, party members had not finished setting up registration or assembling name badges for the roughly 200 county committee members in attendance.
There are roughly 4,000 positions on the county committee in Brooklyn, though there are often many vacancies. Members who can’t attend organizational meetings give their proxy votes over to other members, who vote on their behalf.
Hundreds of county committee members were still waiting to register for the meeting an hour after it had been set to begin.Photo by Kirstyn Brendlen
Proxy votes go to Bichotte Hermelyn by default, and she is believed to hold hundreds of proxy votes, committee members told Brooklyn Paper, though she has not revealed just how many.
At least some county committee members were nominated to the position without their knowledge or consent. In 2022, the Brooklyn Democratic Party submitted at least 20 people to the ballot without telling them, according to The City Reporter. Those members may not have been aware of Wednesday’s meeting at all, Peña told Brooklyn Paper.
The meeting — led by outgoing district leader Anthony Beckford and parliamentarian Rob Robinson — finally began at around 1:30 p.m., three and a half hours late. Though Bichotte Hermelyn had a labeled seat at the table, she did not appear.
It didn’t last long. Not all proxy votes had been submitted, said district leader Diana Rodriguez, and Beckford called for a short recess to rectify the issue. Attendees swarmed the lobby, and the brief recess turned into a two-hour break.
Third Vice Chairperson Anthony Beckford, left, and parliamantarian Rob Robinson led the meeting. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann
The issues continued. County committee members are given remote-like “clickers” to cast their votes, but due to an issue with the system computers, some clickers did not have the voters’ proxies attached.
By 3 p.m., Rodriguez explained to Brooklyn Paper, party assistant secretary Alan Rocoff had said “everything had been entered and counted.”
Reformers had another concern, though. A number of county committee vacancies were set to be filled at Wednesday’s meeting, and several people who were set to be appointed had already received clickers to cast votes, Rodriguez said, even though they were not yet official members.
“[That] is something that we absolutely take issue with,” she said. “Because there was no point at which potential county committee member appointments were informed that they could attend the meeting and vote at the meeting, and so this is being done selectively.”
Members had to use a “clicker to cast their votes; some reported that their votes was not counted. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann
As attendees grew more frustrated — one woman walking out of the auditorium said she felt she was being “held hostage” — longtime county committee members Sharon Harkey and Cheryl Krauss said the meeting was “one of the worst” hosted by the party, rivaling the 2022 meeting in Coney Island.
Some attendees felt the chaos was intentional, a tactic to support Bichotte Hermelyn and her agenda.
“I don’t think it’s entirely intentional, but it’s not like they haven’t done organizational meetings before,” Harkey said. “The level of disorganization is remarkable.”
Appellate court weighs rule changes
As they waited, the appellate court in Brooklyn Heights was hearing arguments on whether the rule changes should remain. The central issue is a monthslong gap between the June primary, when district leaders are elected, and the fall organizational meeting, when those new members technically take their positions. In the interim, the existing committee have some legal authority, per state law.
Justices grilled both sides on just how much authority those outgoing executive committee members are given by state law and party bylaws.
Brooklyn Democratic Party lawyer Anthony Genovesi argued that the Supreme Court had misinterpreted a party bylaw that outlines which members of the executive committee have the authority to vote, and that the outgoing members who took part in the August meeting were still allowed to take part even though they had not been re-elected in June.
“Are you proposing that any elected individual on the executive committee can vote in perpetuity, forever?” asked Associate Justice Francesca Connolly. “Where do you put the limitation on that?”
Mark Hanna, lawyer for the reformers and a longtime district leader himself, argued the outgoing members of the executive committee did not have authority under state law to vote on substantial issues like rule changes.
Associate Justice Helen Voutsinas said one state statute “clearly” gave legal authority to the existing committee until the new members took over in the fall.
“There’s four months between the primary and the date that they can organize,” she said. “We don’t want to render any party unable to function.”
As was expected, the court did not issue a decision from the bench — one is expected in the next several days — so the meeting proceeded with the new rules still in place.
Contested committee votes
Back at City Tech, the meeting finally resumed at 3:30 p.m. — two hours before the group had to clear out of the auditorium.
Beckford swiftly began a series of votes to fill vacancies on the county committee, despite protests from the audience. Some said they were still having issues with their clickers, others said some people set to be nominated to the county committee had not received proper notice of the meeting.
The party and reformers each nominated a slate of candidates to fill county committee vacancies in several assembly districts.
When the results of the first vote appeared on screen, showing that the party’s slate had won, it also showed that 1,240 votes had been cast — more than then 1,142 people Beckford had said were present at the meeting in-person or by proxy.
Assembly Member Jo Anne Simon questioned whether all proxy votes were being counted. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann
Ignoring calls to address the discrepancy, Beckford kept moving through votes, displaying slides that misspelled candidates’ names or listed the same person more than once. The party’s slates won each contest, and the vote totals continued to exceed the number of people casting votes.
Assembly Member Jo Anne Simon questioned whether reformers’ proxy votes were being counted at all, given the results of the votes.
The meeting grew increasingly heated, and many attendees at one point began chanting “shame, shame, shame.”
Beckford and party vice chair Renee Collymore, who was helping to run the meeting, repeatedly asked security to remove speakers, though officers declined to do so.
When it came time to elect new county committee officers, the party’s slate did not have a nominee for chair. Though the party’s slate won, reformers claimed that their nominee for county committee chair — U.S. Rep. Nydia Velazquez — had won by default. (The county committee chair position is separate from the executive committee chair position, which is currently held by Bichotte Hermelyn and is the focus if the bylaw amendments and the lawsuits.)
Party leaders repeatedly asked security to remove certain attendees, though officers declined to do so. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann 
Many attendees were frustrated by the end of the meeting, which ended nearly six hours after it had been scheduled to start. Photo by Gabriele Holtermann
Collymore later said the omission was a mistake, and that she was not sure who the actual chair of the county committee was after the vote. Neither the Brooklyn Democratic Party or Bichotte Hermelyn responded to requests for comment.
The final vote of the night was on the same rule changes approved by the executive committee last month and contested in court. The full county committee was not initially expected to vote on the changes. A Sept. 17 email sent to some county committee members said it “serves as Notice that the bylaw amendment proposals shall be considered and voted upon,” but did not elaborate on what the proposals were. Most attendees said they had never received the rules they were supposed to be voting on at all.
But the amendments passed, 865-272.
Citing time constraints Beckford moved to adjourn the meeting before the all-important executive committee vote, where a new party chair will be elected, to Sept. 29. Rodriguez argued that membership of the executive committee has not been settled, as the appellate court has not yet issued a ruling.
As she exited the auditorium, Harkey told Brooklyn Paper the meeting had taken the crown as “far and away the worst.”
What comes next?
The appellate court is expected to issue a decision in the next several days.
“We’re waiting on the appellate decision, and there may be additional litigation,” said Paul Newell, an attorney for the reformers. “They’ve scheduled the executive committee meeting for Tuesday, but obviously the key question is who is on the executive committee. That’s going to be decided by the appellate division.”
If the court decides the new rules — which were approved by the full county committee — are unlawful, they will likely have to head back to court, Hanna said.
— Additional reporting by Gabriele Holtermann