The Real Face of Political Corruption

There has been a great deal of attention paid to the efforts of the US Attorney for the Southern District to root out political corruption-and a spate of elected officials have been convicted and imprisoned pursuant to his efforts.

Governor Cuomo, last seen punting on the Willets Point illegal lobbying issue while he was Attorney General, has now jumped into the fray using the Moreland Act commission to root out corruption as well. The NY Post’s Fred Dicker reports:

“Despite Cuomo’s high-profile announcement last week that he had assembled “the best minds in law enforcement and public policy . . . to address weaknesses in the state’s public corruption, election and campaign-finance laws’’ to serve on the 25-member commission, he failed to name a single specific area of corruption or individual to be probed.” 

As Jimmy Durante used to say, “Everybody’s getting into the act.” But as helpful - or not - as the current efforts are, they overlook the systemic nature of political corruption-a variant of what Plunkitt of Tammany Hall used to describe as “honest graft.” In a recent issue of City Limits, one such variant is on display in the form of the role political consultants play as both consultants and lobbyists:

“The firms that both consult and lobby turn the typical pay-to-play concerns of government watchdogs on their head. The issue here is not who's giving money to a campaign, but who's receiving candidates' money—in exchange for valuable help.

Consultants are, according to political observers, vital components of any operation: They are in many instances the quarterbacks of campaigns, plotting get-out-the-vote efforts, crafting media strategy and exploiting the weaknesses of the opposition. By accepting or rejecting a client, skilled consultants can significantly affect the odds of a campaign succeeding.

"When a firm helps someone get elected to office, that firm may have an easier time getting access to that office when they're trying to influence how they're going to vote on a particular issue," says Bill Mahoney, the New York Public Interest Group's legislative research coordinator.”

This incestuousness has a particular resonance when it comes to the development of Willets Point where the predations of the Parkside Group are skewing the political debate and skirting the bounds of legality:

“Remaking the cratered world of Willets Point, Queens has been a developer's dream since the imperious and seemingly everlasting reign of Robert Moses. A veritable galaxy of auto repair shops in the shadow of Citi Field, Willets Point is without sewers or paved roads, but its land, long eyed hungrily by developers, may undergo seismic change over the next decade. According to the glowing blueprints, a shopping mall, affordable housing and glittering office buildings will replace the greasy repair shops that tourists eye warily from the expressways.

Actually making this development—controversial, among other reasons, because it will displace many property owners and immigrant laborers—a reality is partially the job of the Parkside Group, perhaps the most dominant political force in the borough that is not elected by anyone. Since last May, they have represented the Queens Development Group LLC, the name for the duo of real estate companies that have won the bid for phase one of the Willets Point development, Sterling Equities and Related Companies. That's one of many lobbying clients Parkside claims. Last year alone, according to the city's lobbying database, the firm billed $1.8 million for its work with city officials on behalf of clients.”

Parkside is the engine that has been driving the Willets Point project from the get-go-and it was this consulting group that was one of the originators of the illegal lobbying scheme that was finally exposed by the NY State AG. Parkside was the official lobbyist when Claire Shulman’s LDC was fined by the NYC Clerk’s Office a record $59,000 for failing to register as a lobbying entity-something that Parkside should have been aware was the law.

Parkside should have also been aware that it was per se illegal for the LDC to lobby at all-and therefore illegal for Parkside to represent the group in a lobbying campaign to re-develop the Iron Triangle. If it wasn’t the actual originator of the illegal scheme, Parkside was, and is, its major aider and abettor. In this capacity, it should have been sanctioned and removed from any effort to further assist in the city’s corrupt deal to hand over Willets Point property to Related and Sterling Equities.

In fact, no such sanctioning took place-neither EDC nor the Shulman LDC were punished; and the Parkside enablers were allowed to escape punishment as well. But the group not only escaped punishment, it was also allowed (as was Sterling) to profit from its questionable actions:

“The battle over Willets Point illustrates how a consultant like Parkside manages to occupy almost every pivotal sphere of the issue. Besides its work for the Queens Development Group, Parkside also lobbies for labor unions that are in support of the Willets Point development, like Local 1500 UFCW and 32BJ SEIU. Meanwhile, Parkside often works side-by-side with the Queens County Democratic Party to ensure, in most instances, their handpicked candidates gain or retain their offices. Four of the elected officials with districts that include or border the Willets Point development—Assemblyman Michael Simanowitz, State Sen. Jose Peralta, Congressman Joe Crowley and State Sen. Toby Stavisky—have employed Parkside for their political campaigns, funneling the firm many thousands of dollars.”

So Parkside-just as Sterling Equities was able to-turned running an illegal scheme into a hugely profitable reward: the representation of the partnership that seeks to redevelop the Iron Triangle at the expense of the existing property owners. Making the situation even more dicey-if that were possible-is the fact that the development’s chief booster, State Senator Toby Stavisky is the mother of Parkside principle Evan Stavisky.

So what we can see at Willets Point is how honest graft operates-and does so at the expense of democracy and the property rights of the Willets Point business owners. In the case of Willets Point, however, the line between honest graft and its more familiar cousin-graft per se-is a thin one indeed.

The US Attorney and the governor are busy fighting corruption-all the while letting a systematic corruption grow and fester under their vigilant noses. As the old aphorism goes:

“The law in all of its majesty, punishes the thief who steals the goose from off of the Commons, but lets the greater felon loose, who steals the common from the goose”

(I)t (R)eally (S)tinks

Word has come down that the IRS has been engaging in a partisan witch hunt against Tea Party and “Patriot” labeled groups - something that we have already spoken about here at length;

“Senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups as early as 2011, according to a draft of an inspector general's report obtained by The Associated Press that seemingly contradicts public statements by the IRS commissioner.

The IRS apologized Friday for what it acknowledged was "inappropriate" targeting of conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status. The agency blamed low-level employees, saying no high-level officials were aware.” (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/irs-apologizes-targeting-tea-party-groups)

We commented on this partisan inappropriateness last year because we were concerned that the agency had ignored out request that it investigate the patently illegal political actions of the Claire Shulman LDC;

We have been tracking the lackluster efforts of law enforcement in bringing the illegal lobbying work of Claire Shulman's Flushing/WilletsPoint/Corona Local Development Corporation to some sort of just enforcement conclusion. We have harped on the fact the NYS Attorney General's Office has completely tanked its original investigation of the illegal lobbying (under Section 1411 of the not for profit laws of NY), but haven't dwelled too much on our complaint to the IRS-something that we had written to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell about.

Now, however, a disturbing story prompts us to re-visit the federal aspects of Shulman's illegal lobbying scheming-the fact that the IRS is hounding Tea Party groups, forcing them through hoops to qualify for their not for profit status. (http://www.willetspoint.org/2012/04/claire-shulmans-ldc-and-irs.html)

What these new revelations tell us is that the IRS - supposedly an independent agency thoroughly detached from political bias - is actually no such thing. The nature of the inquiries were extensive and intrusive - as Kevin Williamson has pointed out;

“Third, and perhaps most troubling, those tea-party organizations were sent letters of inquiry demanding information that would seldom if ever be demanded of any other applicant in the process. The IRS demanded lists of donors, names of spouses and family members, detailed information about political views and associations — all of that “under penalties of perjury.” Many applicants dropped out of the process. The questions were remarkably invasive: For example, the IRS demanded to know not only whether political candidates participated in public forums conducted by the groups, but which issues were discussed, along with copies of any literature distributed at the forum and material published on websites. (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347987/irs%E2%80%99s-tea-party-targeting)

So the IRS, using a political litmus test, was singling out conservative groups in what can only be seen as a tendentious focus on groups that the Obama Administration didn’t like. Ann Althouse has the money quote on the injustice that is involved in selective enforcement;

"We can disagree about what the tax laws should be and how strictly or harshly they should be enforced, but everyone knows it is fundamentally wrong to vary the degree of enforcement, selecting victims by their politics. If government cannot be trusted to avoid that fundamental wrong, it cannot be trusted with any power at all." (http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-problem-wasnt-that-irs-was.html)

Even liberals like Joe Klein are outraged;

“The Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups is outrageous. Those who did this should be fired immediately. That’s obvious…And now they have violated one of the more sacred rules of our democracy: you do not use the tax code to punish your opponents.” (http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/11/irs-mess/)

Which leaves us with the lawbreaking Ms. Shulman. Her LDC was a nonprofit that engaged in direct lobbying that was expressly illegal under the laws of NY State and she submitted fraudulent documents to the IRS claiming that her not for profit group was not engaged in the very lobbying that her group was formed to do-as she herself told the NY Times;

As the group’s director Claire Shulman told the NY Times in 2009 lobbying was the "primary purpose" of FWPCLDC and "the whole idea." However, when filling out the IRS forms under lobbying the group wrote, “No.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/nyregion/21lobby.html)

We plan to re-write to Senator McConnell and see if we can now get the agency to act on a matter that it should have acted on over a year ago but didn’t because apparently it was too busy violating its charter and targeting the political enemies of the president. We’ll give Williamson the last word:

“The misuse of government resources is subject to civil, misdemeanor, and felony charges under federal and Ohio law. The abuse of IRS resources, including the collection of “confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and [causing], in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner,” were cited in the second article of impeachment against Richard Nixon.”

WPU members interviewed on WHCR radio

Photographs of Willets Point United members Irene Prestigiacomo and Joseph Ardizzone during the live community affairs radio program on 90.3FM, hosted by Leroy Baylor; Sunday, October 28, 2012.
Prestigiacomo and Ardizzone, together with documentary video producer Robert LoScalzo, recounted the City's illegal tactics in attempting to implement Mayor Bloomberg's plan to take over Willets Point and give it to the Wilpons and Related Companies -- including lobbying by NYCEDC and Claire Shulman's LDC in violation of state law which the NYS Attorney General has confirmed. The wide-ranging conversation lasted nearly one hour, and included topics such as the shameful refusals of many area elected officials to do anything to help end the City's withholding of municipal services and purposeful neglect of Willets Point; the abuse of eminent domain for the aggrandizement of private interests; the failures of AG Schneiderman and the state Inspector General to hold anyone to account; and other topics raised by listeners who called in.

Information for press in advance of community meeting

WPU Brief For Press Re: LDC 10-18-11
If you would like to know, in a fair amount of detail, what's been happening with the state Attorney General's investigation and Shulman's LDC's brownfield program for the Flushing waterfront (the state taxpayer grant of $1,505,700.00), then read the attached PDF. Today, Shulman's LDC is holding a bogus "community meeting" pertaining to its brownfield program for the waterfront properties. The attached PDF has been sent to all press.

WPU Questions Eligibility of Claire Shulman’s Funding Lackeys

Given the fact that EDC has now issued its RFP for the illegal Phase 1 development of Willets Point, WPU is raising the issue of the legality of developers who are members of Shulman's LDC, and who financed illegal lobbying, participating in the RFP announced by NYCEDC.

This is not a minor point be any means. The NYS Attorney general is investigating the legality of using LDCs to lobby on behalf of city projects and if the office decides to chastise EDC for its funding efforts it would raise serious issues as to whether those firms who have partnered with Shulman’s group should be allowed to munch on fruit from their poisonous tree.

During testimony on October 17, 2008 before the New York City Council Subcommittee on the potential disqualification of LDC Members Deputy Mayor Robert Lieber could not rule out the possibility that "members of the board of the LDC" – presumably Flushing Willets Point Corona Local Development Corporation ("FWPCLDC"), which unlawfully lobbied to influence legislation contrary to § 1411, and which also unlawfully concealed its lobbying activities – would be prohibited from bidding to become developers of the proposed Willets Point development, when NYCEDC would eventually issue its Request For Proposals ("RFP") pertaining to that development.
Hearing Transcript - Planning 101708


All of this was deliciously captured on video as a visibly perturbed Lieber answered the question from CM Monserrate. As those board members in part financed FWPCLDC activities which have been shown to be unlawful, the board members now must not be permitted to profit from any ill-gotten gains, especially by being awarded the developer contract for a project on behalf of which FWPCLDC unlawfully attempted to influence legislation which embodies the project's approval.

Of the 29 respondents to NYCEDC's prior RFQ concerning the Willets Point development -- which was a precursor to today's RFP, and from which NYCEDC was to select firm to receive the RFP -- the following respondents were full-fledged "Members" of Shulman's LDC:
(1) Ciampa Organization
(2) Muss Development LLC
(3) Sterling Equities (Mets)
(4) TDC Development (F&T Group)

In addition, the following RFQ respondents are identified as "Supporters" of Shulman's LDC, at the web site of Shulman's LDC:
(1) Albanese Organization, Inc.
(2) CPC Resources, Inc.
(3) Douglaston Development
(4)Triangle Equities

The press needs to ask EDC who its select group of bidders may be, and if these colluders with the development corporation have been made eligible to bid in spite of their collusion. Our exit question: What would happen if all of this was subject to a RICO indictment?

Claire Shulman and the Attorney General

Crain's Insider (subsc.) focuses in on the stalled investigation of the illegal lobbying of Claire Shulman on the Willets Point development. Shulman's efforts were arguably critical in the city's successful navigation of the ULURP process for the project: "Willets Point property owners are still waiting for the results of an investigation by the state attorney general's office of whether former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman's local development corporation lobbied illegally for the project that will displace them."

Readers might excuse us for being conspiratorial since it has been almost two years since we brought this matter to the attention of then AG Cuomo: "The lack of a resolution when Andrew Cuomo was attorney general prompted a conspiracy theory among owners that he had backed off as a favor to Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who supports the LDC and endorsed Cuomo for governor."

And our conspiracy theory is abetted by the fact that, contrary to Crain's observation, this is a relatively simple matter: "But perhaps the case is just time-consuming: It remains unresolved under Cuomo's successor, Eric Schneiderman, whose election opponent was endorsed by Bloomberg. Schneiderman's spokesman said: “We cannot comment on an active investigation.”

Well, we are glad that the AG acknowledges the investigation's ongoing nature, but it would behoove him to move this thing along since the city-as well as Shulman-is chugging along and operating as if there has been nothing untoward happening here. And the issue at hand is not a complex one.

Section 1411 of the NYS not for profit law makes it prima facie illegal for any LDC to lobby-no ifs ands or buts. If this is true, however, what does that say for the entire lobbying effort organized by EDC-itself incorporated under the same statute?

Making matters worse, Shulman continues to meddle in the affairs of Flushing and Willets Point. In the latest manifestation of her meddling, her group-which, in our view, should have been disbanded a long time ago for violating the law-is now advocating the renovation of the Flushing LIRR station.

Talk about adding insult to injury! But first,here's the Queens Courier's report: "Flushing • Willets Point • Corona Local Development Corporation (LDC) believes the time is now to invest in downtown Flushing’s public transportation infrastructure to provide access to what is arguably the city’s most rapidly developing neighborhood. A massive overhaul project introduced by the LDC known as the Flushing Transit Oriented Development (TOD) plan addresses what the LDC calls an overburdened No. 7 subway line while significantly redeveloping and modernizing the Flushing Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) Station."

Sure is timely Claire, especially since your pet development project will cause intolerable-and unmitigatable-burdens on the very mass transit infrastructure that you now gallantly propose to mitigate. This is real chutzpah!

We have already shown just how the Willets Point project will overwhelm local roads and highways. But it is also important to point out that the same slippery consultants that have played fast and loose with the transit data, have done even worse with the mass transit projections.

You see, in order to lower the projected road impacts the consultants arbitrarily have assigned huge proportions of the project trip generation to mass transit (diminishing the actual traffic impacts by low balling the car usage). And these same gonifs have done the same thing with the nearby Flushing Commons development. It's one huge unmitigated mess.

Which gets us back to the open AG investigation. The Willets Point development was conceived and midwifed in illegality-and the Shulman operation should be shut down as a first step. But the AG should not stop there.

The Bloomberg administration has used illegal tactics to bully WPU property owners off their land, and the entire process should be shut down-and this doesn't even touch on the ramp issues, where false data and illegal maneuvering has made the original illegalities of the Shulman effort appear to be almost quaint.

AG Schneiderman has a rare opportunity to tackle malfeasance at the highest and most powerful levels-going after the pet project of not only the mayor, but much of the Queens political establishment as well. By doing so, he would set himself up as a courageous crusader who operates without fear or favor. He should go for it.

Full text from Crain's Insider:

Willets Point Conspiracy Theory

Willets Point property owners are still waiting for the results of an investigation by the state attorney general's office of whether former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman's local development corporation lobbied illegally for the project that will displace them. The lack of a resolution when Andrew Cuomo was attorney general prompted a conspiracy theory among owners that he had backed off as a favor to Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who supports the LDC and endorsed Cuomo for governor. But perhaps the case is just time-consuming: It remains unresolved under Cuomo's successor, Eric Schneiderman, whose election opponent was endorsed by Bloomberg. Schneiderman's spokesman said: “We cannot comment on an active investigation.”

Crain's Insider Focuses on WPU Eminent Domain Challenge

In this morning's Crain's Insider (subsc.), the newsletter reports on the WPU eminent domain lawsuit that will be filed soon against the city:

"Mike Rikon, the lawyer handling Willets Point businesses' lawsuit fighting eminent-domain condemnations, says a handful of such suits have succeeded in New York, usually on environmental grounds. That's his primary argument in the Queens case, but he's also asserting that City Council approval of the city's action resulted from illegal lobbying by a city-funded local development corporation and from “special deals” the Bloomberg administration made in buying out property owners favored by the council. Rikon said the city erred by not making formal offers and not giving hearing notices to all owners and tenants."

As we have pointed out before, there are proper procedures for treating potential condemnees-and Rikon has highlighted just how far EDC has strayed from following these legal parameters. So the skirting of the legal niceties continues apace in this development.

From the mayor's, "they do it all the time," excuse for the illegal Shulman role in lobbying for the plan, to the end run of proper environmental review of the Van Wyck ramps, EDC does not ever feel constrained by the law-or certainly by what is ethical and proper. We will now see if the courts will constrain this rogue agency and restore the rule of law on Willets Point. The city's illegal bullying tactics need to be stopped.

Crain’s Corrects

In the Tuesday edition of the Crain’s Insider, the newsletter had alleged that the cause of Willets Point United lacked any community based support. After WPU contacted Crain’s, the following was reported: “Property owners fighting a proposed redevelopment in Willets Point dispute yesterday's Insider report that “no community groups stand against the project.” Six Queens groups sent letters in early 2010 objecting to elements of the development. They called for an independent review of the Van Wyck Expressway ramps proposed for the project. Several letters oppose the ramps and call for a moratorium on the use of eminent domain, which may be necessary to clear the project site.”

In addition, the newsletter had also alleged that no council member was supporting the property owners. Certainly, if CM Halloran’s comments at the eminent domain hearing from the other week, he most assuredly can be placed squarely in the corner of WPU in its effort. But what of the other elected officials?

It is quite true that Halloran, and to some extent CM Ferreras for the WP workers, has been a lone voice. But is this a result of the inability of the lobbyist? Or is it something other than that? After all, to see so many elected officials remain silent in the face of injustice is their shame, one that can’t be shared with anyone else.

Whither Claire?

Speaking of injustice, why is no one pursuing the “open” investigation of the former borough president? After all, it was the former Attorney General that allegedly opened it, but allowed it to languish all the way up and through the endorsement of Mayor Mike Bloomberg-and beyond into the new administration of AG Schneiderman.
The investigation of corruption apparently is a quite selective process. We read this morning that the new attorney general is on the corruption beat-going after one of his former state senate colleagues. As Daily Politics points out: “Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has slapped subpoenas on education outfits with ties to Queens state Sen. Shirley Huntley, the Daily News has learned. Our Ken Lovett brings us this exclusive report in today's editions: One subpoena seeking the nonprofit's paperwork went to Huntley's daughter, Pamela Corley, who heads the Parent Information Network, said a source familiar with the probe. A second went to Vanessa Sparks, president of the Parent Workshop, which Huntley created before becoming a senator, the source said.The subpoenas are said to seek information on how the groups used state grants.”

There is, however, no more obvious an illegality than the one committed by Claire Shulman-committed in the name of EDC as it happens. To review: Claire Shulman has admitted to the NY Times: "That was the whole idea. We lobbied the City for the City." (Rivera, Ray. 2009. New York Paid To Lobby Itself, Group Claims. New York Times, August 21, Sec. A.)

Mayor Bloomberg has admitted to the TimesLedger newspapers: "These groups [local development corporations] are designed to lobby. I don't know if they technically broke the law." (Duke, Nathan and Gustafson, Anna. 2009. Bloomberg defends Shulman in Willets Point flap, TimesLedger, August, 27.)

Notwithstanding the clear admissions of Shulman and Bloomberg: The attempt by Shulman's local development corporation ("LDC") to influence the City Council's legislative adoption of Resolutions approving the Willets Point development (including authorization to use eminent domain to acquire property) is contrary to both §1411 of the NYS Not-For-Profit Corporation Law under which all LDCs are organized as well as the Certificate of Incorporation of Shulman's LDC. NYCEDC is likewise an LDC which is subject to the absolute prohibition of attempting to influence legislation that is imposed by §1411, and that is also reiterated within NYCEDC's Certificate of Incorporation.

And there’s strong evidence that not only was Shulman was successful, but that she was the linchpin of the ULURP application being approved. Now, we can’t say for certain what would have happened if EDC hadn’t illegally hire her, but her impact was undeniable-as Juan Gonzales reported at the time.

Claire organized the unions to support the Willets Point development, and their support proved to be a turning point-something that then CM Monseratte has admitted. The bottom line here is that Shulman’s LDC was set up almost exclusively as a lobbying entity, and this crass violation of the law is being allowed to stand-although it could soon become an integral thread in upcoming lawsuits brought against the city.

However, it shouldn’t be up to small property owners like ourselves to bring this issue before the court. Our message to AG Schniederman is a simple one: Please enforce the law without fear or favor.

Politics as usual

Reporting on the mixed record of Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the NY Times writes the following:

...an investigation into whether the administration of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and some public officials violated lobbying laws in their redevelopment efforts is still unresolved after two years. (Mr. Bloomberg last month endorsed Mr. Cuomo’s campaign for governor.)

They are referring to our request for an investigation into Claire Shulman's illegal lobbying efforts as well as a request submitted by Atlantic Yards reporter Norman Oder.

Bloomberg endorsed Cuomo for governor.

Neighborhood Retail Alliance has more.

Photo from the Daily News

Is Cuomo protecting Shulman?

Willets Point Group Claims Cuomo Delay
by Michael Howard Saul
Wall Street Journal, 6/22/10

Queens property owners battling Mayor Michael Bloomberg's effort to redevelop the area near Citi Field are accusing Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of dragging his feet in a yearlong investigation into whether a city-funded corporation broke state law by lobbying for the plan.

The controversy surrounding the Flushing Willets Point Corona Local Development Corp. has exposed friction between aides to Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Cuomo over how quickly the city handed over documents to state investigators.

In a June 17 letter reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the Willets Point property owners demanded Mr. Cuomo, who is running for governor, respond to their allegation that the corporation, led by former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman, conducted an extensive lobbying effort in violation of state law. Ms. Shulman denied any wrongdoing in an interview.

"We're getting a little frustrated on what's taking so long and why he's not acting more quickly," said Jerry Antonacci, president of Willets Point United Inc., the group that filed the complaint against Ms. Shulman's corporation.

"There is no reason for a delay in this."

Mr. Antonacci said he believes politics might be at play because, in his view, it's an open-shut case. "I do feel there's some behind-the-door politicking going on," he said. "That's what I feel in my gut."

Richard Bamberger, a spokesman for Mr. Cuomo, said, "It's an ongoing investigation and therefore it would be inappropriate to comment."

The attorney general's office has complained about the speed with which the city has responded to requests for information.

The final batch of requested documents from the city arrived at Mr. Cuomo's office last week, a person familiar with the probe said. And Mr. Cuomo's office still needs to interview additional witnesses, the person said.

Terri Sasanow, senior counsel at the city's law department, said, "The city has fully compiled with all document requests from the attorney general."

Willets Point, a 62-acre site that is adjacent to Flushing Meadows Park and Citi Field, is filled with scrap yards and auto- repair shops. The mayor's plan, approved by the City Council in 2008, calls for a massive cleanup and the creation of 5,500 housing units and eight acres of parks and playgrounds. The business owners in Mr. Antonacci's group don't want to sell their properties to the city.

Ms. Shulman's corporation received hundreds of thousands of dollars in both public and private money to build support for Mr. Bloomberg's plan. State law prohibits local development corporations, such as the Ms. Shulman's, from attempting to "influence legislation by propaganda or otherwise."

"We did everything in good faith and we continue to believe that," Ms. Shulman said. "It's a good project," she added, referring to the mayor's plans for the area. Ms. Shulman admitted she and her group engaged in lobbying.

"Did we go to speak to members of the City Council? Yes, we did," she said. "We hired lobbyists."

Bob Bishop, an attorney for Ms. Shulman's corporation, said that he believes state law prohibits lobbying of the Legislature. Since Ms. Shulman lobbied the City Council, he said, "the activity is not illegal."

"We are waiting for guidance from the attorney general," he said.

Last year, the City Clerk imposed a $59,090 fine against the corporation because Ms. Shulman failed to register as a lobbyist.

At the time, it was the largest fine issued by the City Clerk for lobbying activity.

Convention center questionable (aka more lies from EDC)

From the Queens Courier:

In an effort to connect with small businesses in the area, newly-elected Queens City Councilmembers recently met with members of the Queens Chamber of Commerce at the organization’s Jackson Heights headquarters.

Some of the issues they discussed included the loss of area hospitals, the Aqueduct Racino project and the possible altering of the original Willets Point revitalization project.

When the meeting touched on the Economic Development Corporation’s possible abandoning of the proposed Willets Point convention center, Councilmember Karen Koslowitz, of District 29, said that dropping that aspect in particular would be disastrous to the local economy.

“To abandon the original plan would be terrible,” said Koslowitz. “What they are doing is taking away jobs and money from us.”

As Queens Crap points out:

The entire project was based on

a) the site being too polluted to stay that way (therefore the entire thing needed to be remediated at once)
b) jobs, jobs, jobs anchored by the convention center.

Part a) was tossed out the window when they went to a phased approach and part b) is on its way out, probably because TDC doesn't think they can build a convention center or it won't be profitable enough for them.

Amazing how the city can approve one plan and then replace it with something entirely different without any elected official raising hell or an investigation being commenced. And the best part is that the City, via Claire Shulman, continues to lobby itself (as well as the state and feds which need to sign off on their disastrous Van Wyck ramp plan) with our tax money even now that we are broke with the electorate begging for crumbs.

Gotta love this city! Developers are ALWAYS the priority!

We couldn't have said it better ourselves!

One more time, Ben Haber!

This letter to the editor appeared in several Queens weekly papers this week:

Dear Editor:

Local development corporations serve a useful purpose.They are designed to deal with proposed city development plans in a local area, to protect the interests of the residents in the area and ensure the city is proceeding in a legal and proper manner.In short, they are not an arm of or partner with the city in the development plans and their interests are often not similar. Precisely because there could be a conflict of interest between the city and the local development corporation, it is illegal for a local development corporation to accept city funds and then use all or a portion of those funds to lobby city officials to support the city’s plans.

As reported in The New York Times on October 30 (“Bloomberg Saw Development as Future, and Future is Stalled”), it would appear the Flushing-Willets Point Local Development Corporation, headed by former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman, and the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership may have accepted city funds and then used portions thereof to lobby city officials. This would not be an insignificant matter because if an illegality has taken place, it may well be any actions taken by the City Council on these matters are null and void. There is an ongoing investigation,and one hopes it is expeditiously concluded and right be done.

Benjamin M. Haber
Flushing

Thanks again, Ben Haber!

From the Times Ledger:

Developer influenced City Council to vote for mayor’s Willets Pt. plan

"Shulman met with Daniel Doctoroff, who was then a deputy to Bloomberg, and agreed to help the mayor with regard to his Willets Point plan. Shulman and Doctoroff are seasoned professionals and cannot be heard to say they were ignorant of the law. But in violation of the law, they arranged a contribution to Shulman’s group of a large amount of city funds and of which the group spent about $450,000 on lobbying, including City Council members whose votes were necessary for the Willets Pointproposal to proceed (“Biz group says Willets Point plan is invalid,” Flushing Times, Aug. 27.)"

As I understand it, Shulman’s local development corporation certificate of incorporation stated the LDC shall not attempt to influence legislation which is a reiteration of the applicable law. The certificate was signed by Shulman. The lobbying of Council members and, to make matters worse, use of city funds to do so was no oversight.

Given the fact we are talking about the destruction of the majority of the 225 economically viable businesses in Willets Point and their thousands of employees and families, the purported violation is not a trivial matter. It warrants a full investigation by the office of state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and, if a violation is found to have occurred, the Council vote must be nullified.

Bloomberg’s attempts to slough off the actions of Shulman and claims that he doubts the law was broken and a “cheap shot” was being taken at Shulman is nonsense. He is making the cheap shots. As head of the LDC, Shulman was not acting as a purported dedicated public servant but as the well-paid head of that group.

It may come as a surprise to Bloomberg and Shulman, but the last I heard the rule of law applies not just to ordinary citizens but to seasoned politicians as well.

Benjamin M. Haber
Flushing

WPU contacts the U.S. Attorney

As reported by the Daily News today:

A group of property owners at Willets Point are taking another swing at a city-funded development company for a lobbying goof.

Willets Point United asked federal prosecutors late last week to wade into its battle with the Flushing Willets Point Corona Land Development Corp. The corporation's leader - former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman - was slapped with a record fine recently for not registering as a lobbyist.

"We're hoping the U.S. Attorney will do something about this," said Michael Rikon, a lawyer who represents the business group. "Anything to stop this kind of conduct."

The development corporation pushed to rezone the gritty industrial area of Willets Point by swaying City Council members - a violation of state law that restricts such corporations from lobbying.

Shulman's group was partially funded by the city Economic Development Corp., which is also barred from lobbying.

EDC officials denied funding Shulman's group for the purpose of lobbying.

"We supported the efforts of the Flushing Willets Point Corona group to engage the local community, promote economic development and boost job creation," EDC spokesman Dave Lombino said Tuesday.

Business owners, however, see Shulman's group as a middleman - a way for the city to lobby itself.

"It's outrageous," Rikon said. "An executive branch of government paid money to lobby the legislative branch."

Shulman could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

NY Times busts Shulman, EDC, Dan Doctoroff and Parkside Group

Looks like the tide may be turning in our favor in the Willets Point saga. The NY Times printed an explosive expose on illegal lobbying by Claire Shulman, funded with taxpayer money by Mayor Bloomberg. From New York Paid to Lobby Itself, Group Claims, By RAY RIVERA, Published: August 20, 2009:

State law says local development corporations are not permitted to “influence legislation by propaganda or otherwise.” Ms. Shulman’s group eventually reported spending $450,000, roughly half its total budget, on lobbying, city records show.

Half the group’s revenues came from the Economic Development Corporation, which is also barred from lobbying. The other half came from corporate sponsors, including the Mets organization, which has long eyed the property, and several developers and construction firms that are expected to vie for lucrative redevelopment contracts when the city puts out requests for proposals in coming months.

Last November, the City Council voted 42 to 2 in favor of the plan, which authorizes the city to use eminent domain to remove the various auto repair shops and salvage yards that occupy the 62-acre portion of Queens. A group of business owners is suing to stop the city.

The group, known as Willets Point United, has asked Andrew M. Cuomo, the state attorney general, to investigate the organization’s lobbying efforts.

“They knew what they were doing,” said Gerald Antonacci, the leader of Willets Point United and the president of Crown Container, one of the area’s more than 250 companies that will be required to move when construction begins. “This was all planned out. They knew she was hiring lobbyists. This wasn’t a mistake.”

The attorney general’s office is reviewing the complaint. In recent months, the office has been looking into lobbying by local development corporations, and has identified a “small but not insignificant set” of groups that appear to be improperly lobbying, said a person briefed on the attorney general’s initial review.

Shulman hit with $59,090 illegal lobbying fine

Fined in lobbying goof

THE CITY-FUNDED group that pushed to rezone Willets Point was slapped with a $59,090 fine yesterday because its leader, former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman, forgot to register as its lobbyist.

Shulman was paid $135,000 last year by the Flushing Willets Point Corona Local Development Corp., which got $250,000 in city funds over two years to support the rezoning.

A spokesman for the group said it will pay the fine from private donations, not city funds.

John Lauinger and Adam Lisberg, Daily News, 7/23/09

Coney Island just like Willets Point (almost)

From the Daily News:

The city's Coney Island plan suffered a major setback Wednesday as officials admitted they had not ruled out the use of eminent domain to acquire land for the project.

The admission, which threatens property owned by developer Thor Equities, came as some City Council members strongly indicated they would vote against the zoning plan this month when it goes before the full Council.

Hmmm...this sounds familiar...

And from the NY Observer:

There’s a common tactic that accompanies most development fights: packing a public hearing.

Usually this is carried out by a variety of groups fighting or supporting a given project—advocates, unions, angry neighbors, wary businesses—who enlist (ideally) scores of people to testify at a hearing in favor of their position, filling a room with sign-holding supporters and making it seem like their argument has more support than the opposition's.

But for a City Council hearing on Coney Island on Wednesday, the Bloomberg administration bused in supporters of its own plan, only to provoke sharp criticism from the Council, as members alleged a misuse of taxpayer funds.

“Why should a city agency be spending taxpayers’ money to bus people in, in order to try to get their proposal?” Councilman Jackson, who was in attendance, told me Thursday afternoon. “Basically, you have the dealer stacking the deck.”

The city paid $1,360 for the three buses, according to Mr. Lombino

Value aside, the act is emblematic of broader Bloomberg administration efforts to counter opposition to its own development plans, efforts that can often be deafening and that threaten initiatives.

The CIDC, which is also a local community development organization, has spent considerable time and resources trying to publicize the city’s plans for Coney Island. In addition to organizing the buses, it’s enlisted the lobbying and community outreach firm Yoswein New York, and has rounded up mailing lists and signatures in favor of the plan at Brooklyn events. When another controversial project, the proposed mega-development for Willets Point in Queens, came up for public review last year, the Bloomberg administration committed $250,000 in funds to a group set up to effectively lobby community members, elected officials, business leaders and others in favor of the controversial project.