We have been complaining quite loudly about the Cuomo choice for the new head of the ethics commission-and the manner in which the comely Ellen Biden was chosen. The arm twisting by the governor-for the ethics chair!-bodes ill for her independence from the state's chief executive and his entire administrative retinue. The WSJ weighs in on this controversial choice:
"The governor’s office encouraged commission members to vote for Biben. In the week leading up to the vote, Cuomo’s office directly reached out to legislative leaders to promote Biben’s hiring, according to people familiar with the conversations. The commission approved her in an 11-to-3 vote and offered her the job, which she accepted."
What this indicates to us-and Biben's refusal to even respond to Willets Point United's request that her IG office look into the governor's choice of Joan McDonald as NYS DOT commissioner underscores our concerns-is that the legislature will be a target rich environment but the governor's minions will be an out of bounds game preserve. But why are we so exercised about the Biben choice?
It's quite simple really. It appears to us that Governor Cuomo actively thwarted the original investigation into the city's illegal use of a development corporation to lobby for the Willets Point project. After getting into a legal dust up with the Bloomberg administration over subpoenas in 2009-2010 then AG Cuomo did a disappearing act after September, 6, 2010 when the mayor endorsed his gubernatorial bid. A few short months later he appoints Joan McDonald (a former EDC executive) to head DOT-the key agency in charge of the oversight of the controversial Van Wyck ramps.
McDonald-at least to out knowledge-never even asked for a waiver for a clear conflict of interest. While at EDC as late as 2007-the lead agency in the Willets Point land grab-she was the vice president for transportation! Gee, might she have a built-in bias on the ramp issue in favor of her old patrons? And lo and behold, after her taking over, DOT does a 180 and becomes completely sanguine about ramps that had created a huge amount of skepticism in the previous administration of DOT.
So, WPU writes to Biiben who doesn't feel any slight compunction about looking into the complaint-or even deign to bother to write a reply that acknowledges the potential conflict of interest charge. And this is the governor's choice for ethics chair? This kind of double standard is why the federal prosecutors have a field day with NYS lawmakers. The governor should be ashamed of this appointment and the manner in which he executed it.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Ethically Speaking-Careful What You Imbiben
City Room has a breaking story about the appointment of Ellen Biben to become the state's lead ethics watchdog-and not everyone is happy with the governor's choice;and we agree with those who are concerned:
"The appointment raises question about the commission’s independence from the executive branch, and its commitment to transparency. The new executive director, Ellen Biben, is a respected former federal prosecutor who served as a deputy under Mr. Cuomo in the attorney general’s office, and now serves as his inspector general. It is not clear why the appointment was not announced, or if Ms. Biben, who is said to have applied for the job, is having second thoughts."
Our agreement with those concerned about Biben's independence comes from the fact that her office has failed to even acknowledge-after more than half a year's time has elapsed-the WPU letter that raised questions about the governor's appointment of Joan McDonald, the former vice president for transportation at NYC EDC, as the new commissioner of NYS DOT. As we said last July:
"WPU sent a letter to the IG on May the 18th concerning the questionable appointment of Joan McDonald, a former NYC EDC executive, as commissioner of SDOT and we have yet to hear from her. In that letter we had pointed out:
"We are now calling on the Office of the State Inspector General to institute a full review of the actions of NYS DOT and its new commissioner in order to determine whether Commissioner McDonald has treated this review process with the fairness and impartiality it deserves.The governor has made governmental ethics a signature policy issue of his administration.
In the same spirit, WPU requests that you institute such a review by first calling on Commissioner McDonald to recuse herself from the ramp review process; and by then calling on the agency to also launch an independent evaluation of all of the environmental data that has been submitted by NYC EDC.
The actions of the new commissioner since she took office need to be subject to close scrutiny. This needs to be done in order to determine whether her past association unfairly deprived WPU and the citizens of New York State of an impartial review of a transportation project that we believe will cause huge negative impacts on the residents of New York City."
Not a peep from someone who-as a laudatory story in Capitol News highlighted-was been portrayed as an overseer who who be fiercely independent politically (unlike those ethically challenged Pataki folks, don't you know). Now Biben's silence on the Willets Point related issue may perhaps be no accident since she had previously headed the NY AG's "Public Integrity Unit," the one that punted the Claire Shulman investigation right after AG Cuomo accepted the endorsement of Mayor Bloomberg: "When Biben accepted the Public Integrity Unit post with Cuomo in 2007, she took over an office that had been gutted by prior administrations but was suddenly facing its most high-profile case in years."
That would be the Hevesi case and Biben and the AG went after the former Comptroller with a vengeance. But what about issues that are closer to home? Never crap where you eat is a phrase that comes to mind and we shouldn't expect any degree of real Independence from Biben on anything that remotely might impact the new Emperor of New York. Everyone else in Albany, as City Room reports, better watch out:
"Mr. Cuomo has put a priority on ethics reform in Albany, where there has been a parade of lawmakers accused or convicted of using their office for corrupt means. He hailed the ethics overhaul last year that created the joint commission as an important step in restoring the trust of New Yorkers in state government."
WPU is not finished with IG Biben, however, and we are going to be asking that her office investigate the conveying of public funds to Shulman's group while it was till supposedly under investigation by the current AG's office. What needs to be said most forthrightly here is that Cuomo shouldn't appoint a loyal retainer to do a job where independence is vitally needed. That he hasn't done so in this case is an indication that-as far as Albany is concerned-the more things change the more they stay the same.
"The appointment raises question about the commission’s independence from the executive branch, and its commitment to transparency. The new executive director, Ellen Biben, is a respected former federal prosecutor who served as a deputy under Mr. Cuomo in the attorney general’s office, and now serves as his inspector general. It is not clear why the appointment was not announced, or if Ms. Biben, who is said to have applied for the job, is having second thoughts."
Our agreement with those concerned about Biben's independence comes from the fact that her office has failed to even acknowledge-after more than half a year's time has elapsed-the WPU letter that raised questions about the governor's appointment of Joan McDonald, the former vice president for transportation at NYC EDC, as the new commissioner of NYS DOT. As we said last July:
"WPU sent a letter to the IG on May the 18th concerning the questionable appointment of Joan McDonald, a former NYC EDC executive, as commissioner of SDOT and we have yet to hear from her. In that letter we had pointed out:
"We are now calling on the Office of the State Inspector General to institute a full review of the actions of NYS DOT and its new commissioner in order to determine whether Commissioner McDonald has treated this review process with the fairness and impartiality it deserves.The governor has made governmental ethics a signature policy issue of his administration.
In the same spirit, WPU requests that you institute such a review by first calling on Commissioner McDonald to recuse herself from the ramp review process; and by then calling on the agency to also launch an independent evaluation of all of the environmental data that has been submitted by NYC EDC.
The actions of the new commissioner since she took office need to be subject to close scrutiny. This needs to be done in order to determine whether her past association unfairly deprived WPU and the citizens of New York State of an impartial review of a transportation project that we believe will cause huge negative impacts on the residents of New York City."
Not a peep from someone who-as a laudatory story in Capitol News highlighted-was been portrayed as an overseer who who be fiercely independent politically (unlike those ethically challenged Pataki folks, don't you know). Now Biben's silence on the Willets Point related issue may perhaps be no accident since she had previously headed the NY AG's "Public Integrity Unit," the one that punted the Claire Shulman investigation right after AG Cuomo accepted the endorsement of Mayor Bloomberg: "When Biben accepted the Public Integrity Unit post with Cuomo in 2007, she took over an office that had been gutted by prior administrations but was suddenly facing its most high-profile case in years."
That would be the Hevesi case and Biben and the AG went after the former Comptroller with a vengeance. But what about issues that are closer to home? Never crap where you eat is a phrase that comes to mind and we shouldn't expect any degree of real Independence from Biben on anything that remotely might impact the new Emperor of New York. Everyone else in Albany, as City Room reports, better watch out:
"Mr. Cuomo has put a priority on ethics reform in Albany, where there has been a parade of lawmakers accused or convicted of using their office for corrupt means. He hailed the ethics overhaul last year that created the joint commission as an important step in restoring the trust of New Yorkers in state government."
WPU is not finished with IG Biben, however, and we are going to be asking that her office investigate the conveying of public funds to Shulman's group while it was till supposedly under investigation by the current AG's office. What needs to be said most forthrightly here is that Cuomo shouldn't appoint a loyal retainer to do a job where independence is vitally needed. That he hasn't done so in this case is an indication that-as far as Albany is concerned-the more things change the more they stay the same.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Doubling Down on DimTec
Earlier we posted on our support for Assemblyman Hevesi's investigation into the little known activities of NYMTC-and we pointed out that the agency's actions regarding the proposed Van Wyck ramps raised real concerns about how it conducts its-and the public's-business. We did, however, leave out some important points that an investigation into NYMTC needs to take a look at.
Our earlier concerns revolved around the fact the NYMTC failed to do any due diligence about the potential negative impact of the city's ramp proposal: "When confronted with the ramp proposal NYMTC never even bothered to do any of the needed due diligence and simply rubber stamped the project because the city sold the group a bill of goods that hid the dramatic traffic impacts that the ramps would have - not only on the Van Wyck - but on local roads as well."
This is an even more serious matter than we first discussed because of the role NYMTC plays in the disbursal of federal highway funds. NYMTC's addition of the proposed Van Wyck ramps to the Transportation Improvement Program ("TIP") list makes the ramp project eligible to receive federal funds. NYCEDC President Seth Pinsky has told the press that the City is attempting to obtain federal funds. NYMTC's negligent failure exercise due diligence to evaluate the proposed ramps, is now the-at least to us fraudulent-basis of the ramps' eligibility for federal funds.
This problematic nature of the NYMTC rubber stamp has been acknowledged by FHWA officials. FHWA has admitted in internal email that it "can be a problem" when NYMTC conducts no review of an application. If it is "a problem", then why has nothing been done to correct it? Rescind the negligently implemented TIP amendment, conduct the proper required analysis, open it to public review, then put the notorious ramps to a NYMTC vote again.
Here's the quote from FHWA's Senior Operations Engineer, New York Division Office:
"Sometimes, [NYMTC's] basic review is nothing more than accepting the info provided by a sponsor and having a vote. Knowing how some sponsors work, this can be a problem. … If the sponsor promotes a project and states all is acceptable in the documentation, I don't think many voters would have asked for further info". – Tom Breslin, Senior Operations Engineer, FHWA, New York Division
Office, email to Ian Francis, Senior Transportation Analyst, NYSDOT Region 11 and Peter King, Director, Planning/Program Management, NYSDOT Region 11;
June 7, 2010, 1:07PM EST.
This has been a screw up and a cover up from the very beginning of the review process-but NYMTC's cavalier attitude to professional review that determines eligibility for federal funds should alarm Hevesi and lead to a thorough shake-up in the agency's make up and decision making structure. Make no mistake here, the city is pushing hard for these federal funds but proper procedures need to be adhered to and NYMTC must be forced to reconvene a proper review before and such funds are ever even considered.
The Willets Point development will-much more than freight rail transportation-wreck havoc on Queens infrastructure and the environment. We have gotten one after the other fraudulent and self serving "analysis" of the impacts and it is time for EDC to come out from under its desk before the city is being faced-as the City of New London-with the unpleasant task of apologizing to the property owners it has unfairly targeted for condemnation.
Our earlier concerns revolved around the fact the NYMTC failed to do any due diligence about the potential negative impact of the city's ramp proposal: "When confronted with the ramp proposal NYMTC never even bothered to do any of the needed due diligence and simply rubber stamped the project because the city sold the group a bill of goods that hid the dramatic traffic impacts that the ramps would have - not only on the Van Wyck - but on local roads as well."
This is an even more serious matter than we first discussed because of the role NYMTC plays in the disbursal of federal highway funds. NYMTC's addition of the proposed Van Wyck ramps to the Transportation Improvement Program ("TIP") list makes the ramp project eligible to receive federal funds. NYCEDC President Seth Pinsky has told the press that the City is attempting to obtain federal funds. NYMTC's negligent failure exercise due diligence to evaluate the proposed ramps, is now the-at least to us fraudulent-basis of the ramps' eligibility for federal funds.
This problematic nature of the NYMTC rubber stamp has been acknowledged by FHWA officials. FHWA has admitted in internal email that it "can be a problem" when NYMTC conducts no review of an application. If it is "a problem", then why has nothing been done to correct it? Rescind the negligently implemented TIP amendment, conduct the proper required analysis, open it to public review, then put the notorious ramps to a NYMTC vote again.
Here's the quote from FHWA's Senior Operations Engineer, New York Division Office:
"Sometimes, [NYMTC's] basic review is nothing more than accepting the info provided by a sponsor and having a vote. Knowing how some sponsors work, this can be a problem. … If the sponsor promotes a project and states all is acceptable in the documentation, I don't think many voters would have asked for further info". – Tom Breslin, Senior Operations Engineer, FHWA, New York Division
Office, email to Ian Francis, Senior Transportation Analyst, NYSDOT Region 11 and Peter King, Director, Planning/Program Management, NYSDOT Region 11;
June 7, 2010, 1:07PM EST.
This has been a screw up and a cover up from the very beginning of the review process-but NYMTC's cavalier attitude to professional review that determines eligibility for federal funds should alarm Hevesi and lead to a thorough shake-up in the agency's make up and decision making structure. Make no mistake here, the city is pushing hard for these federal funds but proper procedures need to be adhered to and NYMTC must be forced to reconvene a proper review before and such funds are ever even considered.
The Willets Point development will-much more than freight rail transportation-wreck havoc on Queens infrastructure and the environment. We have gotten one after the other fraudulent and self serving "analysis" of the impacts and it is time for EDC to come out from under its desk before the city is being faced-as the City of New London-with the unpleasant task of apologizing to the property owners it has unfairly targeted for condemnation.
DimTEC
The NY Times is reporting on the possibility that Assemblyman Hevesi will be investigating the local transportation monitoring organization called NYMTC:
"The State Assembly has begun an investigation of a little-known government body that plays a major role in setting transportation policy in New York City and its suburbs. The investigation is the first significant inquiry undertaken by Andrew Hevesi, the new chairman of the Assembly’s Oversight, Analysis and Investigation Committee. He is investigating the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council...
“It’s an entity that’s ripe for review,” Assemblyman Hevesi said. “I’m not going to prejudge, but there needs to be an analysis of their decision making since they’re using large amounts of taxpayer dollars for different projects in communities throughout the city of New York.”
Oh boy is Hevesi right about that. And while he is at it he might want to examine the role that this group played in the failed oversight of the Willets Point ramps. When confronted with the ramp proposal NYMTC never even bothered to do any of the needed due diligence and simply rubber stamped the project because the city sold the group a bill of goods that hid the dramatic traffic impacts that the ramps would have - not only on the Van Wyck - but on local roads as well.
When the Willets Point United and Brian Ketcham went to the NYMTC meeting last January the assorted members of the group were struck dumb by the information we gave them. But it shouldn't have been if the Department of City Planning-a NYMTC member organization-had apprised the group of the contradictory reporting from EDC's traffic consultant in the FGEIS on Willets Point and the AMR for the ramps.
Hevesi's investigation is prompted by a concern about the impact of rail freight transportation in Queens but he should be even more concerned about a whitewash and rubber stamping of a project that will generate 80,000 car and truck trips a day-choking the Van Wyck and the Grand Central right up to and through the Kew Gardens Interchange.
The exit question is: Who is NYMTC and what does it do to actually protect the public interest when it comes to mega-developments that will adversely impact the local transportation infrastructure and the environment? Millions of dollars flow through the NYMTC funnel. Isn't it time that someone gives some oversight to the overseers?
"The State Assembly has begun an investigation of a little-known government body that plays a major role in setting transportation policy in New York City and its suburbs. The investigation is the first significant inquiry undertaken by Andrew Hevesi, the new chairman of the Assembly’s Oversight, Analysis and Investigation Committee. He is investigating the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council...
“It’s an entity that’s ripe for review,” Assemblyman Hevesi said. “I’m not going to prejudge, but there needs to be an analysis of their decision making since they’re using large amounts of taxpayer dollars for different projects in communities throughout the city of New York.”
Oh boy is Hevesi right about that. And while he is at it he might want to examine the role that this group played in the failed oversight of the Willets Point ramps. When confronted with the ramp proposal NYMTC never even bothered to do any of the needed due diligence and simply rubber stamped the project because the city sold the group a bill of goods that hid the dramatic traffic impacts that the ramps would have - not only on the Van Wyck - but on local roads as well.
When the Willets Point United and Brian Ketcham went to the NYMTC meeting last January the assorted members of the group were struck dumb by the information we gave them. But it shouldn't have been if the Department of City Planning-a NYMTC member organization-had apprised the group of the contradictory reporting from EDC's traffic consultant in the FGEIS on Willets Point and the AMR for the ramps.
Hevesi's investigation is prompted by a concern about the impact of rail freight transportation in Queens but he should be even more concerned about a whitewash and rubber stamping of a project that will generate 80,000 car and truck trips a day-choking the Van Wyck and the Grand Central right up to and through the Kew Gardens Interchange.
The exit question is: Who is NYMTC and what does it do to actually protect the public interest when it comes to mega-developments that will adversely impact the local transportation infrastructure and the environment? Millions of dollars flow through the NYMTC funnel. Isn't it time that someone gives some oversight to the overseers?
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Vinson & Elkins Files Amicus Brief in Support of Petitioners in Willets Point Condemnation Lawsuit in the New York Appellate Division, Second Dept
January 26, 2012 — Vinson & Elkins has filed an Amicus brief in support of the petitioners in Serrone v. City of New York, a lawsuit challenging the City of New York’s planned redevelopment of the Willets Point area in Queens, New York.
The petitioners in Serrone, a group of Willets Point businesses and landowners, challenged the City’s redevelopment on a number of grounds, including compliance with New York environmental laws and the city’s planned use of eminent domain to take private property. The case implicates important questions about the protection of private property rights under the United States and New York constitutions, including whether there is a judicially-enforceable limit on the government’s exercise of eminent domain in cases where the government alleges that a property is “blighted” or of sub-standard condition.
Vinson & Elkins partner David Hawkins and associate Jeremy Marwell, together with co-counsel John S. Marwell of Shamberg Marwell & Hollis PC, filed the brief on behalf of the Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc., a New York-based nonprofit organization dedicated to providing information and education about the right to own and use private property. The brief argued that the proposed taking is unconstitutional and that courts must retain an important role in articulating and policing constitutional boundaries on the government’s use of eminent domain.
Vinson & Elkins’ Condemnation and Land Use litigation group is dedicated to condemnation and land use trial and appellate work. V&E’s condemnation lawyers have significant experience litigating against federal, state, county, and local governments as well as private corporations that have been legislatively delegated the power of eminent domain. Our representation includes properties of all sizes, shapes, and uses including residential, commercial, industrial, ranch, and special purpose properties (schools and churches), as well as vacant land.
Vinson & Elkins LLP is an international law firm with approximately 760 lawyers across 15 offices worldwide. For more information, please contact Susan Peters at 1.212.237.0149.
The petitioners in Serrone, a group of Willets Point businesses and landowners, challenged the City’s redevelopment on a number of grounds, including compliance with New York environmental laws and the city’s planned use of eminent domain to take private property. The case implicates important questions about the protection of private property rights under the United States and New York constitutions, including whether there is a judicially-enforceable limit on the government’s exercise of eminent domain in cases where the government alleges that a property is “blighted” or of sub-standard condition.
Vinson & Elkins partner David Hawkins and associate Jeremy Marwell, together with co-counsel John S. Marwell of Shamberg Marwell & Hollis PC, filed the brief on behalf of the Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc., a New York-based nonprofit organization dedicated to providing information and education about the right to own and use private property. The brief argued that the proposed taking is unconstitutional and that courts must retain an important role in articulating and policing constitutional boundaries on the government’s use of eminent domain.
Vinson & Elkins’ Condemnation and Land Use litigation group is dedicated to condemnation and land use trial and appellate work. V&E’s condemnation lawyers have significant experience litigating against federal, state, county, and local governments as well as private corporations that have been legislatively delegated the power of eminent domain. Our representation includes properties of all sizes, shapes, and uses including residential, commercial, industrial, ranch, and special purpose properties (schools and churches), as well as vacant land.
Vinson & Elkins LLP is an international law firm with approximately 760 lawyers across 15 offices worldwide. For more information, please contact Susan Peters at 1.212.237.0149.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
WPU to MLB: You'll Regret a 2013 All-Star Game at CitiField
What does the Great American Pastime-baseball-have in common with the un-American abuse of eminent domain, the eradication of scores of minority-owned businesses, the City's decades-long willful neglect of an entire neighborhood? Well, absolutely nothing as it turns out, but if MLB gets its way and schedules an All Star Game at CiitiField than the great American game will be colluding with a project based on lies and deception-and WPU intends to aggressively promote all of this to world-wide media, if Major League Baseball dares to hold its 2013 All-Star Game right next to our property at Willets Point.
The following letter, sent by WPU to Baseball Commissioner Allan "Bud" Selig, makes clear that for a variety of reasons, MLB would be wise to consider other venues for its 2013 All-Star Game.
MLB All Star Game Letter 120114
The following letter, sent by WPU to Baseball Commissioner Allan "Bud" Selig, makes clear that for a variety of reasons, MLB would be wise to consider other venues for its 2013 All-Star Game.
MLB All Star Game Letter 120114
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Unconventional Wisdom
The governor made big news last week when he announced that he was selecting the Aqueduct raceway site as the location for a new NYC convention center-but not everyone thinks this is a good idea: "Still, the question is whether the Queens project makes sense, experts said. The convention business is highly competitive, and attendance is falling around the country. Most convention centers are run by public authorities at a deficit."
Add Helen Marshal to the doubters. In 2008 she approved the original Willets Point plan with the expressed purpose that it includes a convention center: "In an opinion signed today, Ms. Marshall called Willets Point “underutilized” and said it was time to redevelop the 61-acre neighborhood in the shadows of the Mets new Citi Field. But she added 11 conditions to her recommendation, calling for continued community input, more affordable housing, guarantees of a convention center..."
The removal of the convention center possibility only highlights how the Willets Point plan is really no plan at all-something that former Council member Monserrate realized back before he changed sides on the issue: "Unfortunately, the Queens Borough President chose to support this vague and noncommittal plan rather than question it,” City Councilman Hiram Monserrate said in a statement. “That's why the project's opposition continues to grow broader and deeper.”
The convention center bait and switch adds fuel to the fire of the WPU criticism of EDC's latest change of plans-a Phase 1 that was never envisioned when the city council approved the project. On January, 27th Judge Joan Madden will have the city and WPU's Mike Gerrard in court to argue the legality of this phased-in development. She should keep the convention center switcheroo in mind when she decides just what to do with the failed promises of EDC.
Add Helen Marshal to the doubters. In 2008 she approved the original Willets Point plan with the expressed purpose that it includes a convention center: "In an opinion signed today, Ms. Marshall called Willets Point “underutilized” and said it was time to redevelop the 61-acre neighborhood in the shadows of the Mets new Citi Field. But she added 11 conditions to her recommendation, calling for continued community input, more affordable housing, guarantees of a convention center..."
The removal of the convention center possibility only highlights how the Willets Point plan is really no plan at all-something that former Council member Monserrate realized back before he changed sides on the issue: "Unfortunately, the Queens Borough President chose to support this vague and noncommittal plan rather than question it,” City Councilman Hiram Monserrate said in a statement. “That's why the project's opposition continues to grow broader and deeper.”
The convention center bait and switch adds fuel to the fire of the WPU criticism of EDC's latest change of plans-a Phase 1 that was never envisioned when the city council approved the project. On January, 27th Judge Joan Madden will have the city and WPU's Mike Gerrard in court to argue the legality of this phased-in development. She should keep the convention center switcheroo in mind when she decides just what to do with the failed promises of EDC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
