Staten Island Democrats Pledge to Work With Mayor-elect Mamdani, After Skipping the Campaign

Staten Island’s chilly embrace of a new progressive mayor portends uneasy balancing acts for city and borough alike.

On an island renowned for political outliers and ferry gripes, 55% of Staten Islanders ticked the box for Andrew Cuomo in New York City’s mayoral primary—leaving Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani with a paltry sub-25% showing, even as he ran the table elsewhere.

With vote tallies barely dry, Democratic officials on Staten Island have commenced a delicate public dance: how to engage a mayor whom they did not back, and whose left-leaning platform sits uneasily with much of the borough’s electorate. Councilmember Kamillah Hanks, one of the rare North Shore Democrats, extended a brisk congratulation and a promise to “hold all city leadership accountable to the unique challenges and opportunities our borough faces.” Assemblymember Charles Fall, who chairs the Richmond County Democrats and represents the only assembly district Mamdani won on the island, was yet more reserved, pledging to “work with whoever wins” but underscoring the need to “advocate for the issues Staten Islanders care about”—namely public safety and quality of life.

For a borough accustomed to being New York’s afterthought, the poor showing by Mr Mamdani was little surprise. Staten Island may be within city limits, but its political fibre more closely resembles that of suburban America: reliably more conservative, more car-dependent, and more sceptical of City Hall. The mayor-elect’s buoyant support in Queens, Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx risks setting up a citywide mandate that collides with the priorities of New York’s smallest and least trusting borough.

The coming months will test Mr Mamdani’s approach to consensus, particularly as his proposed progressive policies—expanding rental protections, policing reforms, and transit re-jigs—face stiff winds from Staten Island. Local leaders warn that the administration must attend to the borough’s singular grievances: rising opioid deaths, snarled commutes, and patchy infrastructure investment. Failure to do so risks cementing a tepid citywide unity and deepening the “forgotten borough” moniker.

Beyond parochial considerations, the brewing cold shoulder holds larger economic and political implications. Staten Island’s distinct demographics—a median household income nearly $84,000, a swelling population of 495,000, and the city’s highest share of homeowners—give it outsize weight as a barometer of moderate New York opinion. If Mr Mamdani’s team struggles to win over even its Democratic officials here, a tough road lies ahead with citywide centrists and suburban swing voters. Policy experiments popular in Astoria or Bed-Stuy seldom translate smoothly to Tottenville or Arden Heights.

This dynamic also complicates the borough’s already uneasy relationship with City Hall purse strings. Staten Island has long argued, with some justification, that its share of city investment lags far behind its tax contributions. New big-ticket projects—such as the North Shore Bus Rapid Transit or ferry terminal upgrades—contend with a shrinking municipal budget and increasingly ideologically divided city council. State funding, too, is shrinking: the last three budget cycles saw reductions in direct aid as Albany eyed less politically friendly ground.

Nationally, such fissures mirror a broader pattern: ambitious urban progressives capturing citywide or statehouse power, only to trip on their patchwork local coalitions. In Chicago, Los Angeles and London, new leaders with ballyhooed citywide visions have struggled to reconcile cosmopolitan bases with outlying districts chafing at perceived neglect. The Staten Island example bodes as something of a warning for American cities lurching leftward: old geographic and class divides persist, and they punish mayors who confuse a plurality with a consensus.

It is instructive, too, that even Staten Island’s Democrats largely snubbed the new mayor on the stump. Councilmember Hanks and Assemblymember Fall both kept their distance, instead opting to endorse Mr Cuomo, erstwhile governor and avatar of centrist Realpolitik. The lone exception—former councilmember Debi Rose—provides proof that progressive inroads are possible, if limited, especially in the more diverse North Shore precincts. The question for Mr Mamdani remains whether he will seek to court the island’s Democratic establishment or double down on his base. The early signs, at least from the borough, hint at a wary handshake rather than full-throated embrace.

A city’s distant fifth wheel

For the immediate future, Staten Island’s political stance appears stubbornly transactional: work with the mayor, yes, but only on the island’s terms. Borough Democrats now tread cautiously, wary of alienating voters who can swing Republican in general elections or bolt entirely for higher office. For the city’s wider ecosystem, this posture is neither a crisis nor a comfort. New Yorkers are no strangers to local resistance, but in an era of anemic fiscal appetites and mounting post-pandemic needs, consensus across boroughs proves more crucial than ever.

Still, the city cannot afford to write off a borough of nearly half a million—particularly given its yawning needs. Staten Island’s opioid overdose rates bloat past city averages, its transit remains both slower and more expensive, and its public safety debates, while sometimes overheated, reflect real concerns about crime and policing in less densely peopled pockets. Shunning these issues in favour of a broader slate of progressive reforms risks sowing resentment and, ultimately, policy sabotage.

If there is a template for progress, it lies in data-driven compromise. City Hall would do well to prioritise visible fixes: cleaner streets, reliable transit, vigilant (if judicious) policing, and investments in recovery services. In return, local politicians might consider swapping some permanent suspicion for measured partnership—extracting guarantees or pilot programmes attuned to borough needs, while conceding the occasional citywide initiative. Such realpolitik portends slow but workable progress, in contrast to grand gestures or social-media theatrics.

For the rest of New York, the spectacle of Staten Island’s post-election posture is less alarming than illustrative. As America’s cities grow more politically diverse, leaders must dispense with fantasies of uniformity and learn the political arts of brokerage and patience. Mr Mamdani’s coming term, and the careful choreography of his relations with his city’s distinct fifth wheel, will provide a test—and likely a model—for urban governance under new ideological conditions.

New York, ever fractious and never dull, marches on: ferry rides and all. ■