City about to transfer 23 acres of land to developer without approved plan

From Willets Point United:

Through the Willets Point grapevine, we hear that the City is about to transfer ownership of 23 acres comprising the “Phase One” area of Willets Point, to Queens Development Group (“QDG”) – the joint venture of Sterling Equities (whose owners also own the New York Mets) and The Related Companies that the Bloomberg administration designated as the developer. This is the infamous give-away of 23 acres of valuable taxpayer property, which cost hundreds of millions of public dollars to acquire, to developers for the unjustified price of $1 (one dollar).

For the de Blasio administration to proceed with this sale at this time is outrageous and potentially illegal, for reasons summarized below.

First, Bill de Blasio is squandering a golden opportunity to cancel the Bloomberg administration’s planned, unjustified give-away of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of taxpayer property to QDG for the price of $1 (one dollar), and instead to establish a legitimate price that is truly in the taxpayers’ interest.

Second, recall that the key reason that QDG was chosen to develop the Willets Point Phase One site, to the exclusion of several other developers that had submitted proposals, was that only QDG claimed to be able to expand the project by constructing its proposed “Willets West” mega-mall on public parkland located west of Citi Field stadium. If QDG is now unable to deliver that mega-mall on parkland, then the basis for choosing QDG as the developer in the first place no longer applies. Allowing QDG to develop the Willets Point Phase One property despite QDG being unable to deliver the Willets West mega-mall is to allow a “bait-and-switch” on the grandest of scales.

Third, it appears that the de Blasio administration is on the verge of transferring ownership of all lots that comprise the 23-acre Willets Point Phase One site to QDG for $1 (one dollar), on the basis of authorizations granted by then-Mayor Bloomberg and the Queens Borough Board during December 2013, pursuant to City Charter § 384(b)(4).

Since the City acquired additional lots within the Willets Point Phase One area after December 2013, whose sale could not have been authorized pursuant to City Charter § 384(b)(4) during December 2013, new authorizations of Mayor de Blasio and the Queens Borough Board are necessary before all of the lots within the Phase One area may legally be transferred to QDG.

Fourth, Francisco Moya, who has been elected the new City Council representative of Willets Point and nearby neighborhoods, previously announced his own plan concerning Willets Point development. Among other aspects, Moya intends to form an advisory council of neighborhood stakeholders, to evaluate and help to guide development decisions.

No irreversible action, including property sale, should take place at Willets Point before Councilman-elect Moya’s advisory council is in full operation and has had ample opportunity to significantly participate in decision-making.

Elizabeth Crowley knew about Maspeth shelter in JUNE, told no one

Questioning @NYCHRA Commissioner Banks at BP @MelindaKatz's Borough Board meeting on homelessness in Queens. pic.twitter.com/e8yrExVVWu

— Jimmy Van Bramer (@JimmyVanBramer) October 19, 2016

Something a bit earth-shattering - at least if you live in Maspeth - happened last night at Borough Hall. As you are likely aware, DHS Commissioner Steven Banks gave a presentation to the Borough Board. He also took questions from the board members. Elizabeth Crowley got into it with him. He then responded by stating, "When I met with you in private in June and explained to you what our plan would be, I never said any of the things that you said." You can hear the exchange yourself by downloading the file from here. The exchange begins at 0:56:06.

So, despite what Crowley, Addabbo and Markey would like everyone to believe, this was known about long before that secret Maspeth Library meeting where she acted surprised and outraged in front of members of the community board and the community at large. And why would she meet with Banks privately, if not to make a deal?

One night only...Steven Banks!

QUEENS, NY – The Queens Borough Board, chaired by Borough President Melinda Katz, will hear a presentation from Steven Banks, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Social Services, during the Board’s meeting on Wednesday, October 19, at 5:30 PM in Queens Borough Hall. Commissioner Banks will discuss the state of homelessness in Queens.

WHAT: Borough Board to Review the State of Homelessness in Queens with Social Services Commissioner Steven Banks
WHEN: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 5:30 PM
WHERE: Queens Borough Hall, 120-55 Queens Boulevard in Kew Gardens
WHO: MELINDA KATZ, Queens Borough President, Members of the QUEENS BOROUGH BOARD
STEVEN BANKS, Commissioner, New York City Department of Social Services

Maybe someone can ask him about this, from the NY Times, August 28, 1991:

Steve Banks, of the Legal Aid Society, called the commercial hotel alternative "poorly conceived."

"For the city to be using the Yellow Pages to find commercial hotels for families flies in the face of everything we know about how to solve this problem," said Mr. Banks.

DeBlasio's zoning proposals tank at Borough Board

From Progress Queens:

In a brief meeting of the Queens Borough Board, chaired by Borough President Melinda Katz (D-Queens), the members voted overwhelmingly to reject two City Hall rezoning proposals being considered city-wide.

The Zoning for Quality and Affordability, or ZQA, would essentially allow developers to build larger buildings to accommodate affordable housing. The proposal to create Mandatory Inclusionary Housing zoning, or MIH, would require affordable housing as part of any new development over 10 units. The ZQA and MIH proposals are central to the affordable housing plan put forth by Mayor Bill de Blasio (D-New York City) to build or preserve 200,000 units of affordable housing over a span of ten (10) years.

In prior meetings of the Community Boards of Queens, the Community Boards had overwhelmingly rejected the proposals. Going into Monday evening's Queens Borough Board meeting, the outcome was never in doubt.

After the votes were taken by simple voice votes and the Borough Board meeting came to a conclusion, Borough President Katz made statements to the press.

"The next step is the Borough Board has voted to disapprove both amendments. And we look forward to discussing with the administration how we can improve these amendments, so that we can provide sufficient affordable housing in the City of New York."

Sound like Melinda is going to vote yes eventually.

City planning thinks seniors don't drive

From the Times Ledger:

Borough community board heads were outraged over the potential loss of parking spaces Tuesday at the city’s Department of City Planning presentation on the proposed zoning text amendments needed to push forward the mayor’s affordable housing plan for seniors.

City Planning requires changes to zoning regulations in order to meet the goals of the mayor’s affordable housing plan. The presentation on zoning for quality and affordability and mandatory inclusionary housing focused on new senior housing across the borough.

But in those changes, parking space in Queens, the transit wasteland, would disappear from city-owned affordable housing for seniors.

“I want you to drive through the Liberty Avenue corridor late at night and tell me if there is a need for parking or not,” Elizabeth Braton, chairwoman of Community Board 10, said.

The board pointed out the lack of transit hubs across the borough and the difficulties seniors face during the winter. Board members said for seniors having their own vehicle gave them a sense of independence and it was cruel to take that away.

“You don’t have to go far. Why don’t you just try parking outside of Borough Hall tonight?” George Stamatiades, vice chairman of Community Board 1, asked the City Planning officials.

Katz, Borough Board opposed to de Blasio zoning plan

QUEENS, NY - Queens Borough President Melinda Katz stated the following in response to questions about the preliminary proposal to eliminate or reduce parking spot requirements for any affordable and/or senior housing, as presented by the Department of City Planning to the Borough Board last night:

“Serious concerns were raised by the Queens Borough Board. In a transit desert like the borough of Queens, the reality for many families is having to rely on cars to get to work. For our seniors, we want them to maintain an independent, active quality of living for as long as possible. Our current mass transit system – including subways, buses and Access-A-Ride – is simply insufficient in reliability, frequency and reach to warrant stripping parking requirements. We share the goal of creating more affordable units, however, and we’re glad the city is coming up with outside-the-box ideas to reach this goal. We look forward to continuing discussions with the agency about alternative solutions for fair and smart growth.”

The preliminary proposal was one part of the Department of City Planning’s overall presentation about “Zoning for Quality and Affordability”.

Tomorrow's borough board meeting sounds like fun

From Progress Queens:

Borough President Katz will host a meeting of the Queens Borough Board on Monday, Dec. 1, at 5:30 p.m. at Queens Borough Hall to discuss large-scale real estate development of Queens.

Scheduled to be discussed during the meeting is an agenda item titled, "Planning for the Future of Queens – an Update on Strategic Initiatives." Carl Weisbrod, a director of the New York City Department of City Planning and Chairman of the New York City Planning Commission, is expected to address the meeting, according to the Borough President Katz's media advisory.

The Queens Borough Board meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. Monday evening, and the meeting will take place in the Borough President’s Conference Room of Queens Borough Hall, 120-55 Queens Boulevard, 2nd Floor.

Queens finds itself in the cross-hairs of real estate developers and government officials for major development, none of which fully addresses the need for the creation of large-scale stock of affordable housing. Mayor Bill de Blasio (D-New York City) announced that the city would target Flushing, Queens, for zone-busting development, and the city's Economic Development Corporation has expressed interest in exploiting Jamaica, Queens, for rapid development, as well. Flushing is encompassed in Queens Community Boards 7, 8, and 11, whilst Jamaica is encompassed in Queens Community Boards 8 and 12. Already, a group has formed in Jamaica "to build relationships with private companies" to facilitate real estate investments in Jamaica.

Residents in Queens, including long-term immigrant residents, have opposed the conversions of hotel facilities into permanent homeless shelters, like the former Pan American Hotel, as seen on Oct. 3, 2014. Queens is being targeted for rapid upscale real estate development at the same time when the borough is also paradoxically being chosen as the setting for a greater share of the city's homeless shelters and for more juvenile inmate detention centers.

Separately, the city is looking at Queens for the creation of permanent homeless shelters, which is causing turmoil in bedroom communities opposed to inconveniences associated with shelters, even pitting long-term immigrant residents against newly-arrived immigrants. The city is also evaluating the need to create a permanent detention center in Queens for juvenile inmates to comply with new state regulations at the same time when federal prosecutors, in an unrelated action, have recommended to the de Blasio administration the relocation of teenage inmates away from Rikers Island, a recommendation that New York City Councilmember Elizabeth Crowley (D-Queens) said could be accomplished by renovating the now-vacant Queens House of Detention.

Borough Board voted to transfer property that hasn't yet sold

From the Times Ledger:

Opponents of the Willets Point redevelopment have claimed the city cannot legally transfer all of the land for the project to developers without additional approvals from Mayor Bill de Blasio and the Queens Borough Board.

In November 2013, the Queens Borough Board consented to the sale of 23 acres the city had slated for the first phase of the project to developers Queens Development Group, a joint venture between Sterling Equities and Related Cos., for $1.

The city has since cleared out many of the businesses in Phase 1 and has started readying the site to be transferred to the developers. Willets Point United, a group representing business and land owners in the area, has contended the property cannot yet be conveyed to the developers because the city did not own all the necessary parcels at the time the sale was approved.

“Only Mayor Bill de Blasio is empowered to authorize the sale of Willets Point property that was not city-owned during the Bloomberg administration,” the group wrote in recent letters to state Sen. Tony Avella (D-Bayside), who forwarded their concerns to the mayor, the city Economic Development Corp. and other involved agencies last Friday.

The group cited a subsection of the city charter, which authorizes the mayor to only sell property “of the city.”

“How could the borough board vote on something that wasn’t even sold yet? What if the people didn’t sell?” said Gerald Antonacci, a representative of Willets Point United. “How could they possibly give away that person’s property until after it was bought?”

The mayor’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Katz brushes off FOIL request

July 11, 2014

Elisa Velazquez, Esq.
Counsel to the Borough President
Office of the Queens Borough President
120-55 Queens Boulevard
Kew Gardens, New York 11424-1015

Re: Pending Records Access Request dated May 23, 2014

Dear Ms. Velazquez:

On May 23, 2014, I submitted a records access request (“Request”), made pursuant to the New York State Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”), which seeks, in rough summary, minutes of Queens Borough Board meetings held between December, 2013, inclusive, and April, 2014, inclusive. Pursuant to the New York State Open Meetings Law, those are public records, subject to public access. (See POL § 106(3).) On May 27, 2014, the Request was delivered.

On June 3, 2014, you replied via letter (duplicate attached) which states in relevant part: “… we are in the process of locating and reviewing the documents responsive to your request and will forward same to you within the next two (2) weeks.”

Contrary to that assurance, no records were produced to me within two weeks, or at any other time thereafter. Indeed, I have received no further communication from you or from anyone else at the Office of the Queens Borough President concerning the FOIL Request.

On June 23, 2014, I wrote to you (duplicate letter attached) in an attempt to ascertain the status of the pending Request. I noted that “more than two weeks have passed, and I [have] not received any records or further correspondence,” and I requested that you “please send the responsive records or at least notify me of your intention regarding the Request.” On June 24, 2014, said letter was delivered.

As of this writing, I have not received any response from you to my letter dated June 23, 2014; and I still have not received any records or further communication in response to my FOIL Request – constituting failure by the Office of the Queens Borough President to comply with FOIL.

The Freedom of Information Law exists because “[t]he people's right to know the process of governmental decision-making and to review the documents and statistics leading to determinations is basic to our society” and because “a free society is maintained when government is responsive and responsible to the public.” (See POL § 84.) It is not acceptable and very disappointing, that the Office of Queens Borough President Melinda Katz thwarts the intent of FOIL, by not producing records or even communicating as required to resolve a records access request; and moreover, by not responding to a requestor’s written attempt to follow up.

I kindly request – again – that the Office of the Queens Borough President please immediately produce to me the records that are responsive to my Request.

Sincerely,

Robert LoScalzo

2 enclosures

cc: Robert Freeman, Esq.
Executive Director
New York State Committee on Open Government

Camille Jobin-Davis, Esq.
Assistant Director
New York State Committee on Open Government

Letter_140623

Letter_140603

Cowardly council members hide during USTA borough board vote

From the Queens Chronicle:

The USTA’s proposal reached the Borough Hall-stage of the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure during a Borough Board hearing on Monday before it winds its way towards a vote in the City Council and a hearing before the City Planning Commission.

But the gathering abruptly ended with a touch of confusion, as the various community board chairmen and women and four City Council members left without conducting a vote due to the lack of a quorum.

The unusual move was propagated by a dearth of the 12 eligible voters needed, falling short by one City Council member. The math for a quorum calls for at least one person more than half of the 22 eligible voters in the USTA’s case. A dozen would have put a vote through — a vote the USTA may have lost.

The absence of 11 lawmakers came on a day when the City Council had no scheduled hearings after 2 p.m. and no stated meetings.

Councilmen Danny Dromm (D-Jackson Heights), Peter Koo (D-Flushing), Donovan Richards (D-Rosedale) and Ruben Wills (D-Jamaica) were the only members of Queens’ council delegation at the meeting. All four were set to vote “No” on the project, according to a source close to the City Council who asked to remain anonymous. Had a fifth member of the council delegation arrived to reach a quorum, the three opposing community boards and four councilmen would have combined to deliver a 7-5 no vote, the source said.

The lack of a quorum did not come as a surprise to at least one person, as Marshall’s statement before the board indicated a lack of voters even though it was prepared ahead of the meeting.

A vote is not necessary in order to proceed with ULURP, and the borough president plans to submit a recommendation on Thursday.

Several members of the Borough Board said “Let’s vote anyway,” with some murmurs of phoned-in votes but those calls were quickly shot down by Community Board Director Barry Grodenchik, who invoked procedural rules in stopping a vote.

The absence of lawmakers came at a delicate time in the negotiations between the city and the USTA. Councilwoman Julissa Ferreras (D-East Elmhurst) will be the guiding vote on the matter, as the USTA’s facilities fall within her district. Her vote at the Borough Board would have shown her cards too soon, sources say. And in the annals of councilmanic politics, it’s considered bad manners to speak out on an issue outside one’s district before the presiding lawmaker takes a stand. Which means bupkis for the USTA now that it’s moving on to the City Council.

I guess we know Grodenchik's position on selling parkland off to the highest bidder. Another perfect BP candidate! The Queens Chronicle summed it up in their editorial:

Think your vote doesn’t matter? Don’t feel bad — neither do those cast by members of the Borough Board.

That’s one of the nifty tidbits revealed by Monday’s canceled vote on the United States Tennis Association’s expansion plans. The board lacked a quorum you see — and somehow Borough President Helen Marshall knew it would ahead of time, as evidenced by her prepared remarks.

No worries, some members said, we vote without a quorum all the time. (Oops! Did we say that out loud?)

Well, this time they didn’t vote. But that didn’t hold up the plan, oh no. Marshall will just approve it herself.

Why do we waste time and money on sham votes by sham boards that mean absolutely nothing in the end?

MLS to sell snake oil at their dog & pony show

From A Walk in the Park:

Just a week after Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber claimed a Flushing Meadows stadium was nearing "the finish line," a meeting of the Queens County Board learned last night the league was actually years away from having a finished plan.

Speaking after an intense PR blitz by the league, MLS President Mark Abbott refused to contradict his boss’ imminent start date. But it was hard to see how a realistic proposal could come together when the league had yet to locate an acceptable replacement park site, or develop a parking plan, much less find an owner for the new team or figure out how to pay for the stadium.

MLS is holding a townhall meeting on the project at 7 p.m. tonight, December 4, at the Queens Theatre in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, next to the Queens Museum of Art.

After a number of well attended community organized town hall meetings were held in opposition to Major League Soccer's proposal the league is doing a dog & pony show Tuesday night.

Flushing Commons deal is done

From the Times Ledger:

The $800 million Flushing Commons development project has cleared its final bureaucratic hurdle after nearly a decade of planning.

The Queens Borough Board voted Monday evening to approve the city’s plans to sell the downtown Flushing land where the project is slated to be built to its developer, TDC Development.

The vote was unanimous but came with a healthy does of chastising by City Council members and Eugene Kelty, chairman of Community Board 7, which did extensive work to address community concerns regarding the project.

“The Community Board has tried to work hard to make sure the project was modified as best it could be ... The EDC needs to follow through with the letters, the community needs to be satisfied and the EDC needs to continue to work with [Councilman] Peter Koo [R-Flushing],” Council Land Use Committee Chairman Leroy Comrie (D-St. Albans) said.

Kelty said at CB 7’s Sept. 13 meeting that he would only vote to support the project Monday if the city, the developer and other groups drafted letters indicating that they would address remaining concerns CB 7 had about the proposal.

In the end, Kelty said he nearly voted no for the project because of these issues but that he and his other executive board members decided that it was best to vote in favor since most concerns had been addressed.

From the Neighborhood Retail Alliance:

As we expected, the barking being done by CB 7's Gene Kelty about Flushing Commons turned out to be meaningless-and frankly we weren't surprised that the former fire marshal resorted to self-immolation, since he has been huffing and puffing to no avail for years; while at the same time fronting for the kind of development that will severely hurt the community he allegedly represents.

EDC must be laughing their collective asses off-and their contrition is risible: "Carolee Fink, the EDC’s project manager for Flushing Commons, apologized to Kelty after the meeting and told him the agency would move to quickly fulfill his request." These are the kinds of promissory notes that are best suited for being utilized to replace a used roll of Charmin.

Good luck, Gene...

From the Queens Chronicle:

When Community Board 7 OK’d the massive $850 million Flushing Commons mixed-use development project in April, it was with several recommendations. Now with the plan fully approved, the board is trying to hold the city’s and the developer’s feet to the fire.

“We wanted concessions and now is the time to work them out,” said CB 7 Chairman Gene Kelty, “but we don’t want to be rushed into it.”

Kelty was referring to a Queens Borough Board meeting set for Sept. 20, which has on its agenda a vote on the Flushing Commons business arrangements. The board consists of all 14 Queens City Council members, community board chairpersons and the borough president.

Although the project was approved by the City Council last month, the specifics have to be approved by the Borough Board. “It’s not part of the land use public review process,” Kelty said. “It’s a technicality with no public comment and only the affected community board chairman votes on it.”

He wants the meeting moved to October, giving his community board time to discuss the issues.

Topics to be covered include the time frame of the project, interim parking during construction, the funding stream and stipulations if the developer fails to get full finances.

“These are just some of the subjects that have to be addressed,” Kelty said. “We want to see the plans in writing.”

Other issues include where 109th Precinct officers will park patrol cars during construction, bus changes and traffic rerouting.

“We also want to negotiate concessions,” Kelty added. “We asked that the old YMCA building become a public school and want the developer to put in a small movie theater in the project.”