City throwing $$$ at Trump cronies through homeless shelter non-profits

From Patch:

The 75-bed shelter at 243-02 Northern Blvd. will be run by the nonprofit Samaritan Village. It is slated to open in late 2021.

It would be the first homeless shelter in the Northeast Queens district overseen by Community Board 11, according to the NYC Department of Social Services, the umbrella agency for the Department of Homeless Services.

Oh? Well, Samaritan Village has a stellar reputation! (J/K. We know all about them.)

Hey, has anyone looked into who owns this building now? Let's take a look.

Hmmm...that address...that phone number...those initials... Why, this is LLC is part of the Bayrock Group! And we all know who Bayrock was deeply involved with, yes?

But that's not all! They also own a shelter in Hollis AND the controversial Manhattan shelter. We could keep going (and we will later)...but suffice it to say that they have entered the homeless shelter business head on. Years ago they were eyeballs deep in a development nightmare in Whitestone which got foreclosed on during the financial crisis.

So we're taking Trump's name off buildings and canceling his contracts with the city with righteous indignation while simultaneously enriching his checkered-past pals via multi million dollar social service contracts? Sounds very de Blasio-esque!

Does ANYONE in the media or government look into this shit or are they too busy navel gazing on Twitter and reflexively painting the people who question these things as bigots?

CB7 had something to talk about last night

Public comment from Paul Graziano RE: Waterpointe / Bayrock / Former Grace Property at Community Board 7 Meeting, Monday, December 18th, 2017

Over a decade ago, a carefully crafted agreement was made between the previous owner, government and the community pertaining to the property formerly known as Bayrock/Waterpointe on the Whitestone waterfront.

This agreement, which was negotiated with former Councilmember now-State Senator Tony Avella; Community Board 7; and local residents and civic associations called for 52 single-family detached houses and a waterfront park on what was then a lightly contaminated site. I was personally involved in reviewing the initial proposal, subsequent changes and final submission as an urban planning consultant to then Councilmember Avella.

The site was initially cleaned up correctly. It was then sold and purposefully contaminated with heavily polluted debris, creating the need for a DEC consent order demanding the correct clean-up of the site to proceed with development.

While this was happening, the current owners started to pitch that they wanted/needed to build a much denser development than what was agreed to. There is no question that this is a non-starter with the community, the Community Board and Senator Avella.

However, with the site having been purposely contaminated *again* the idea that the developers are seeking anything less than a full clean up of their property is difficult to believe. It is even more unbelievable that the NY State DEC and other regulatory agencies are considering going against their own regulations which do not allow a Level IV cleanup to occur when the development plans are for single-family detached homes under multiple ownership.

This project must not be allowed to proceed without the full Level I cleanup that is necessary for public safety, not to mention future homeowners who may purchase houses on this site. Anything less than this is clearly irresponsible and should be immediately challenged by the public.

Paul Graziano, Principal
Associated Cultural Resource Consultants

Questioning Cy's judgment

From NPR:

"If we could have prosecuted Harvey Weinstein for the conduct that occurred in 2015, we would have," said Karen Friedman Agnifilo, chief assistant district attorney.

But criminal attorney Matthew Galluzzo, who once worked in the DA's sex crimes unit, told The Associated Press he believed the audiotape, in which Weinstein acknowledges touching Gutierrez on the breast, could have been used to pursue a case.

"She can testify about what happened, and you've got him acknowledging he did something wrong," Galluzzo said.

Before this week, questions were also being raised about Vance's handling of a fraud investigation involving the Trump SoHo, a condo hotel built by the Bayrock Group. Some early buyers of units at the hotel sued Bayrock, arguing that they had been misled about the hotel's sales records.

The Manhattan DA's office had considered pursuing fraud charges against Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr., who played a big role in promoting the hotel. An investigation by The New Yorker, WNYC and ProPublica said prosecutors wanted to pursue a criminal case, but Vance said evidence to do so was lacking.

The report also noted that Vance had received a $32,000 campaign contribution from one of Trump's lawyers shortly after dropping the case. Vance had also received an earlier donation, which he had returned.

"It was improper for him to accept it in the first place. He responded by returning those donations and then apparently accepted them again after the fact," noted Jim Cohen, a professor at Fordham University School of Law.