The case against Yes

 

 

Queens Chronicle

Residents, elected officials and community groups on Wednesday gathered outside City Hall to announce a lawsuit against the zoning changes under the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity plan, which passed in December.

The Article 78 complaint, filed on Tuesday night, argues that the plan violates the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review.

Quoted in a press release from the office of Councilwoman Joann Ariola (R-Ozone Park), the suit alleges in part that the city failed to properly examine “significant areas of environmental concern.” According to the release, the City Planning Commission concluded that new development under the plan would have no significant negative impact on communities, even though many neighborhoods face issues such as flooding, pollution and overcrowded schools.

“How, with a straight face, can the city of New York say that what they’re doing is not going to have an effect on these things, which are already overburdened and overtaxed, at capacity or beyond capacity, today?” urban planning consultant Paul Graziano said at the press conference.

The City of Yes, Mess and Less Affordable Housing is complete

 

AMNY 

A compromise version of Mayor Eric Adams’ zoning overhaul aimed at easing the city’s dire housing crisis squeaked through the City Council on Thursday, clearing its final hurdle to become law.

The mayor’s “City of Yes for Housing Opportunity” plan, a suite of proposals that promises to allow for “a little more housing in every neighborhood,” passed the 51-member chamber by a slim 31-20 votes on Dec. 5. The city estimates the plan will spur the construction of 82,000 new housing units over the next 15 years, down from the 109,000 homes it was projected to produce before the council’s modifications were made.

All that remains is for Adams to sign what will likely be his greatest signature accomplishment as mayor thus far into law.

Adams, during a City Hall rally on the heels of the vote, compared his administration to the 1986 Mets team that won the World Series.

“We’re gonna argue in the locker room, we’re gonna get in debates, we’re going to do all sorts of things, but you know what? We’re gonna bring home the championship ring,” Adams said. “That’s what we did…You’re seeing the most comprehensive housing reform in the history of the city.”

 

City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, following several council members’ impassioned speeches for and against the plan, said the body “cannot do nothing” about the city’s dire housing crisis. She also emphasized that the modified version of the zoning text amendment hashed out by the council is far better than what the mayor initially proposed.

“This council cannot be the body that says ‘no’ to people that need a place to live,” Speaker Adams said in an emotional speech. “This cannot be the council that turns their back on homeless; this cannot be the council that continues to say ‘scrap it, let’s move ahead and do something else,’ because I tell you that will never happen.”

 

The plan consists of a series of updates to city zoning rules that have not been changed in over half a century. It’s designed to expand the amount of housing that can be built in parts of the Big Apple that typically do not see much development.

The zoning changes only narrowly passed the city legislature even after they were altered last month to assuage many council members’ concerns about them potentially altering the character of the neighborhoods they represent. The final deal between City Hall and the council also includes a $5 billion commitment from Adams’ office and Gov. Kathy Hochul to fund affordable housing construction, housing affordability programs, infrastructure improvements, and more staff for city housing agencies.

Several council members acknowledged that the modifications addressed their concerns and got them to a “yes.” 

 

The lawmakers who voted against the City of Yes included every member of the chamber’s conservative Common Sense Caucus, some Democratic members representing low-rise outer-borough neighborhoods, and one progressive who saw the plan as a giveaway to developers.

City Council Member Joann Ariola (R-Queens) said her “no” vote was driven by her constituents’ concerns that City of Yes would change the character of their neighborhoods. She also expressed concerns that the infrastructure in her district, which covers coastal areas in the Rockaways, will not be able to support the added housing that would come with the plan.

“The city of yes will only add to the heavy burden that residents face every day,” Ariola said. “We don’t have the infrastructure and I know the mayor has promised money for infrastructure. But why are we putting the cart before the horse? Why are we putting the housing up and then worrying about the infrastructure?”

David Carr, a Republican council member representing Staten Island, who also voted “no,” said he believes the plan is “incredibly vulnerable to legal action” and “will not survive” such action, which could be forthcoming.

Progressive Council Member Christopher Marte (D-Manhattan) said he voted against the plan because it is a “yes to only the real estate developers.”

Update:

The lawsuit against the City Of Yes is about to begin. Donate to their gofundme to put a stop to this real estate land and air grab.

 

We need your support to cover legal fees, compliance costs, and expert consultations as we oppose the City of Yes rezoning plan. This sweeping proposal threatens to undermine our neighborhoods, eliminate public input on critical land use decisions, and promote unchecked overdevelopment and excessive density.

The City of Yes is a giveaway to developers at the expense of our communities’ character, livability, and long-term sustainability. With your help, we can push back and ensure responsible urban planning that prioritizes people, not profits.

Your donation will empower us to make our voices heard and protect the future of our neighborhoods. Join us in this fight—every contribution counts!

 

 

Judge brings the noise back

 

QNS

A Queens Supreme Court judge officially dismissed one of several lawsuits brought against the operators of Forest Hills Stadium on Wednesday in a win for concertgoers.

At the end of 2023, Concerned Citizens of Forest Hills Inc. et al. vs. The West Side Tennis Club, which leases out the stadium, was filed in the Queens Supreme Court. Less than a year later, the judge found that the plaintiffs “failed to indicate that the harm is isolated to only them” and not the wider community. 

Three named plaintiffs outlined significant and “unbearably loud” noise that travels from the stadium on concert nights into their homes on behalf of hundreds of residents. They say that for the last decade, they have struggled to relax at home due to the noise that exceeds the city’s noise code and continues past the 10 p.m. curfew. 

Some residents supported the lawsuit’s call to cease concerts at the historic stadium in hopes of bringing back quiet to the residential neighborhood. However, in recent weeks, over 25,000 people signed a Change.org petition in support of the stadium and its benefits to the community.

In their request for the community’s support, organizers of the stadium called the lawsuit “frivolous” and defended themselves as good neighbors to local residents. The group responsible for bringing some of the top acts in music to Queens in the warmer months was glad to hear that the judge dismissed the suit.

“The entire Forest Hills Stadium team is delighted and grateful to the court for today’s decision. We are also heartened by the outpouring of love from the Forest Hills community, our neighbors and the more than 25,000 people who have signed a petition to support the Stadium,” read a statement from Akiva Shapiro of Gibson Dunn, a law firm retained by the West Side Tennis Club.

Tenants displaced by apartment building fire gets temporary housing from the landlord they are suing

 

 Queens Post

A breakthrough was reached just days after tenants of a Sunnyside apartment complex filed a lawsuit against their building’s landlord stemming from their displacement following a 5-alarm fire in December.

Queens Borough President Donovan Richards and A&E Real Estate, the landlord, announced a plan Monday to provide 22 tenants of 43-09 47th Ave. who were forced out of their apartments on Dec. 20 due to fire damage with an additional round of six-month temporary housing agreements.

After the fire, which was determined to have been caused by a contractor using an unregulated blowtorch, A&E offered the tenants the option of signing a temporary relocation license agreement for “up to six months if needed,” allowing them to rent apartments at other A&E properties at the same monthly rate they had paid at their Sunnyside building. Those original agreements were set to expire on Tuesday, July 2.

“Through no fault of their own, our neighbors tragically lost their homes and their possessions in the heart of the holiday season,” Richards said. “I’m thankful to A&E Real Estate for its partnership and for its support of these families by offering additional temporary lease agreements. Going forward my office will work tirelessly with our partners in city government to ensure those displaced by the fire have continuous access to stable and affordable housing.”

A spokesperson for A&E Real Estate said the agreement was with 22 households that are still in A&E temporary housing as of Monday.

“Borough President Richards picked up the phone and asked how we could work together to do more for residents. Working through the weekend, we found a path forward that will enable us to offer temporary housing for residents affected by the fire for up to six months more,” the spokesperson said. “While we know this has been challenging, we have worked hard at every step to go above and beyond to give residents some security and breathing room to plan for the future.”

The additional temporary lease agreements will run through Jan. 15, 2025, giving impacted families another six months to secure more permanent housing.

“Ultimately, it’s the insurance settlement that will compensate all parties for their losses in the fire,” the A&E spokesperson said. “We appreciate Borough President Richards’ partnership in finding an approach that we can sustain for several months more.”

The lawsuit filed on behalf of 200 tenants seeks $10 million in damages for gross negligence in failing to properly supervise their contractors and/or employees. Brett Gallaway, the tenants’ attorney from the law firm of McLaughlin and Stern, emphasized the severity of the situation.

“The reckless actions of A&E have caused irreparable harm to these families,” Gallaway said. “This lawsuit seeks to hold them accountable for the devastation they have caused and their continued failure to provide adequate support and compensation to the displaced tenants.”

 Considering the stupidity of the developer's contractor, A & E should just let those tenants have those apartments they are only temporarily staying in. Wonder what they look like and I wonder if they are building new "affordable housing" in this town.

 

 

Quid Blow Quo

A former police colleague of New York City Mayor Eric Adams claims in a bombshell new lawsuit alleging sexual assault that he exposed himself to her and demanded she perform oral sex on him in exchange for help with a job issue more than three decades ago.

The accuser, Lorna Beach-Mathura, first came forward in November by filing a notice of claim saying she planned to sue Adams for sexual assault. The brief November filing didn’t include specifics about the accusation.

 

NY Daily News

In response to the newly filed lawsuit, Sylvia Hinds-Radix, the city government’s corporation counsel who’s representing Adams in the sexual assault case, said the mayor vehemently denies Beach-Mathura’s accusations.

“While we review the complaint, the mayor fully denies these outrageous allegations and the events described here; we expect full vindication in court,” Hinds-Radix said in a statement.

The suit, filed Monday afternoon in Manhattan Supreme Court, alleges the incident took place in 1993, when Beach-Mathura and Adams both worked for the city Transit Police Department.

In addition to being a transit cop, Adams was at the time a top official for the Guardians Association, a Black police officers’ organization. Beach-Mathura, who was also a Guardians member, alleges Adams picked her up in his car after work in Manhattan and brought her to a vacant lot near the Hudson River after he had agreed to meet with her to talk about helping her get a promotion in the Transit Police Department.

Beach-Mathura said she went to Adams with the employment issue because she found him “inspiring” and thought he could help in his capacity as a Guardians leader. She alleges she first got to know Adams from working with him years earlier.

Initially, Beach-Mathura alleges in the lawsuit Adams was going to pick her up and give her a ride home to Coney Island to talk. Once in the car, she realized instead that he was headed to an area near the Hudson River, which made her “nervous and scared,” the lawsuit says.

Once in the empty lot, Beach-Mathura alleges Adams asked her to explain her employment issue. After she did, “Adams told Plaintiff that he thought he could help her but that he ‘also needed some help’ and began rubbing his penis through his clothes with his hand,” according to the lawsuit.

Adams then told her he wanted oral sex from her in exchange for his help, the court paper says. The lawsuit says “while repeatedly cajoling, demanding, and begging Plaintiff for oral sex, Defendant Adams unzipped his pants” and exposed himself.

Beach-Mathura alleges she “repeatedly and adamantly refused” Adams’ overtures. The suit claims Adams then “assaulted” Beach-Mathura “by grabbing her hand and placing it on his exposed” genitals and told her to masturbate him.

Beach-Mathura alleges she again refused, repeatedly saying, “No,” and trying to pull her hand away. Beach-Mathura “feared that she would be raped” by Adams, but “tried to remain calm,” the lawsuit alleges.

“Plaintiff was frightened not only due to Defendant Adams’ appalling conduct, but also because she knew that he, as a police officer, had at least one loaded gun in the car,” her lawsuit charges.

Beach-Mathura claims that after several more attempts, Adams stopped trying to talk her into a sex act, and instead started masturbating. Court papers say semen from Adams landed on Beach-Mathura’s thigh and stocking.

After the alleged assault, Beach-Mathura claims in the suit that Adams told her he needed to get back to work. He then drove her to the Chambers St. subway station in Manhattan where he dropped her off, according to the suit.

She alleges Adams never helped her with the employment issue. She left city government in 1994 and currently lives in Florida, where she has worked as a public school teacher.

Beach-Mathura claims she told “numerous people” about the alleged assault, including current and former NYPD officials as well as her two daughters, according to the suit.

She said she never formally reported the incident out of fear of retaliation from Adams, the Guardians or the NYPD, all of whom are named as defendants in her lawsuit. In addition to accusing Adams of sexual assault and battery, Beach-Mathura’s suit says the Guardians and the NYPD violated anti-gender violence laws by having “enabled” his alleged behavior.

The NYPD and the Guardians did not immediately return requests for comment on Beach-Mathura’s suit, which is seeking $5 million in damages.

 

Restaurant shanties hit with lawsuit again

 

AMNY

New York City has been hit with a class action lawsuit seeking to overturn its newly permanent outdoor dining program, with petitioners claiming the popular al fresco eateries are an unconstitutional nuisance.

The suit, filed against the city in Manhattan Supreme Court on Monday by 30 New York City residents, claims the recently-enacted permanent outdoor dining program — which replaced the temporary, emergency-authorized program that began during the COVID-19 pandemic — is illegal for not having been subject to a full environmental impact review and public comment.

That allowed the city to enact what the petitioners describe as a “massive change to the cityscape that defines New Yor[k] City” that is “highly destructive to city neighborhoods and the petitioners who reside in them.”

Before the pandemic, outdoor dining was only allowed in a few areas of the city, mostly in Manhattan, and was subject to a long, bureaucratic and expensive approval process. Soon after COVID-19 struck the city and forced restaurants to shut their doors, city officials used emergency powers to significantly liberalize permitting for outdoor dining, allowing thousands of eateries the chance to reopen for customers to dine in and greatly expanding the scope of al fresco eating. Many built elaborate shacks on the sidewalk or roadway for dining.

City officials and restaurant industry reps have claimed the outdoor dining program saved 100,000 restaurant industry jobs and kept innumerable eateries from having to close. Pandemic-era polls showed the program to be broadly popular with New Yorkers; a December 2020 poll by Siena College and Transportation Alternatives found 64% of voters, including 78% of Manhattan voters, found outdoor dining a valuable use of curb space.

Still, others were less than enthused from the beginning. Critics of outdoor dining have contended that dining sheds take away parking spots, attract rats and other vermin, are havens for homeless New Yorkers and crime, and bring noisy crowds to their blocks for all-night revelry.

“This saturation of outdoor seating is not serving me, my family, or my business. It has made this neighborhood pretty much unlivable most of the time,” said Ellen Koenigsberg, a Lower East Side resident who owns a vintage clothing shop and is a petitioner in the class-action suit, in an affidavit. “I feel like I always have uninvited guests in my apartment that just will not leave.”

Others are perturbed by what they contend are “ugly” dining sheds.

“They mostly look like large, dirty garages and disrupt and change the nature of the street,” said fellow Lower East Side resident and petitioner Elizabeth Dworkin. “It feels like a fort has been built on the block to keep the local residents away so paying customers and bars, clubs, and restaurants can occupy all of the public space.”

This claim about how these shanties saved 100,000 jobs is highly dubious, until you consider that probably over half of them were waiters on wheels from all those bike deliveries during the pandemic.

 

More Ardila pre-Assembly malfeasance

 

NY Post

Assemblyman Juan Ardila — who faced accusations of sex abuse — hasn’t yet paid $19,200 in arrears for a two-bedroom Maspeth apartment he used to rent, a Queens landlord claims.

In an interview with The Post, his former landlord, Anne O’Reilly, said she’s not afraid to take Ardila to court over the issue.

“I feel like it’s an injustice to me,” she said.

But Ardila scored a temporary legal victory last month when a Queens judge dismissed a case filed by O’Reilly in June when Ardila only owed $11,200.

He moved out in November. (wow, he was still squatting there after he won the election-JQ LLC)

The judge ruled Ardila, who was sued alongside unnamed roommates, was served outside the required 10-17 days before a court date, a technicality that won’t prevent O’Reilly from refiling the suit in the future.

She told The Post she aims to do just that to get Ardila to pay the year of outstanding rent.

“I’m a nurse and try to take care of people and I think people should respect everybody and if I’m working hard I expect everyone else to work hard — if they’re working — to pay their rent,” she said.

Ardila tried to turn the tables on his former landlord in a statement to The Post where he claimed he and his mother had been harassed by her.

“My mother and I moved to this apartment when I was 14. I was staying with my girlfriend but my mother has endured relentless harassment from her landlord, particularly throughout the pandemic & even left her without heat during some of the coldest days,” he said in a statement that included a link to a past 311 heating complaint.

“Experiences like these only reinforce my unwavering commitment to advocating for tenants’ rights and protections in Albany,” he added.

But Ardila, who technically was not on the lease signed by his mother when he was a child, did not say whether he still owed rent to O’Reilly until several hours after The Post reported about the dismissed suit.

“I do not owe rent,” he said.

The legal win for the rent-skipping legislator came one month after two women accused Ardila of forcibly touching them at a 2015 party while they were intoxicated. 

Juan should be really grateful that George Santos exists as the worst elected official from Queens, because he deserves just as much press scrutiny and notoriety.

The Department Of Transportation Alternatives gets sued

Charles v City of New York - Complaint - FILE STAMPED by queenscrapper on Scribd

Co-op sues DOT and Lyft for inducing Citibike racks on parking spaces by their apartment buildings

 

New York Senate shadowban

Reclaim The Net 

 New Yorkers who criticize the state’s Senate on Twitter have been blocked from commenting and seeing tweets, according to FIRE who is representing a New Yorker who was blocked for criticizing the state’s new gun control legislation.

In June, the US Supreme Court struck down a New York State legislation that required people to have a license to carry a concealed firearm outside of their homes. The state’s legislature responded by expediting a new gun control legislation limiting who is allowed to carry firearms among other controls.

New Yorkers upset with the reform took to Twitter to express their frustration. According to FIRE, the state’s Senate Twitter account hid about 90 tweets and blocked multiple users.

Twitter allows accounts to hide replies and block people, which prevents them from commenting and seeing future tweets. The New York State Senate’s account takes advantage of these features to hide criticism of legislators and legislation.

Because the Senate is a government entity, it is going against the First Amendment by blocking users. Several courts have agreed that when a government entity invites public comment on social media, regulating comments and engagement violates the First Amendment. The most notable case was when a court ruled that then-President Donald Trump violated the First Amendment by blocking critics on Twitter.

It's now legal in New York to write an autobiography during a pandemic while people are dying

 

Politico 

Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo won a lawsuit Tuesday in which he challenged New York’s defunct ethics agency’s attempt to seize his profits from a $5.1 million book deal about the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Joint Commission on Public Ethics determined last year that Cuomo improperly used state staff and resources while writing his 2020 memoir on the pandemic, “American Crisis.” It ordered him to surrender his compensation to the state.

But Cuomo’s legal team refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the JCOPE ruling, and Albany County Supreme Court Justice Denise Hartman issued a decision that sided with him on Tuesday afternoon.

Hartman determined that JCOPE’s actions against the ex-governor would “violate due process” by not following the proper procedures for bringing an action and overstepping its authority.

“JCOPE was seeking to impose sanctions for Cuomo’s alleged non-compliance with JCOPE’s outside activities rules,” she wrote. But state law says it can “impose sanctions only for violation of the statute, not for violations of JCOPE’s rules.”

Cuomo’s team quickly praised the decision.

“JCOPE’s utter lawlessness in its treatment of Governor Cuomo has been exposed and the rule of law prevailed,” attorney Rita Glavin said in a statement. “JCOPE’s conduct was shameful, unlawful, and a waste of taxpayer’s funds.”

The Democratic governor resigned a year ago amid sexual harassment allegations, and the book was widely criticized for its large payout to Cuomo and months later when a state report found his administration undercounted Covid-19 deaths in nursing homes by as much as 50 percent.

Open restaurant shanties law will be heard by State Supreme Court

If there is debate about keeping outdoor dining restaurant shanties on the streets of #NYC, this one should end it. As rats scurried away from piles of wood that were dismantled from the structure where they once called home

This is under every one of these, even the fancy ones pic.twitter.com/XeeOStZeVx

— JQ LLC (@ImpunityCity) July 19, 2022

 

 NY Daily News

A Manhattan lawsuit calls for the city and state to scrap the outdoor dining option launched when the pandemic hit in 2020, arguing the al fresco operations now leave a bad taste in their mouths.

The eight-page Supreme Court filing cited “increased and excessive noise, traffic congestion, garbage and uncontrolled rodent populations (and) the blocking of sidewalks and roadways” since the Temporary Outdoor Restaurant program began in June 2020.

“Now some restaurant owners are using the sheds for storage, not for outdoor dining ... some are filled with garbage,” said Brooklyn Community Board 4 Chair Robert Camacho in an affidavit with Friday’s suit. “Some are filled with garbage. Some have kids in there getting high.”

 In addition, the lawsuit alleged, the outdoor dining option created problems for traffic on city streets and sidewalks, along with a dearth of parking spaces for customers that leads to a reduction in business.

“TOR also continues to appropriate substantial share of public sidewalks and streets for private use and profit,” the suit alleges.

Lower East Side restaurant owner Vincent Sgarlato supports the continuation of outdoor dining in the city — to a point. Some of the outdoor operations near his eatery turned into “putrid structures” over time, and cleanliness in general has become a pandemic problem in the area, he said.

City sues developer for damages to Elmhurst firehouse

 

PIX News  

  Firefighters are a beloved part of the neighborhood and the firehouse represents safety and security.

But in Elmhurst, Queens along Grand Avenue, the building that houses the FDNY is showing some wear and tear. Neighbors fear it may have to close. The city says the structure needs to be rebuilt or significantly repaired.

In a lawsuit filed this month, the New York City Law Department, which represents the mayor and city agencies, seeks to recover $23 million.

“We are determined to hold these owners and their contractors responsible. They should pay for the costs the City has incurred to address the dangerous conditions and get this firehouse fully repaired,” said NYC Corporation Counsel Sylvia Hinds-Radix.

The city built a shelter across from the firehouse in a side street to park the heaviest vehicles.

James McMenamin lives nearby and works with the Newtown Civic Association. “There had been no work for 11 years and then this past year work began again by another development company,” he said.

Neighbors are working with local elected officials and community boards. “The firehouse must stay open. If they’re thinking of closing it, it has to be relocated close by,” said Sally Wong.

Part of Councilmember Bob Holden’s district is covered by the firehouse. “It’s unfortunate a firehouse is to be displaced and an entire street closed. The community is distressed by this on a number of levels. What do we do if we build another building? How long will that take,” he said.

Bayside clinic watered down vaccines to produce more inoculations

NY Daily News 

A Queens COVID-19 site systematically diluted vials of the life-saving Pfizer vaccine in order to dole out more doses, according to a new lawsuit filed by an employee claiming he was pushed out of the company after he started asking questions.

Jamie Zheng says Centers Urgent Care, the operator of the vaccine distribution site at Korean Community Services in Bayside, fired him after he learned of a policy to dilute the doses beyond the CDC’s recommendation.

“It makes me feel guilty,” said Zheng, 33, who ran the site from March to July of last year.

“Just thinking about the people waiting on line, mostly the Asian community. They were so excited. They want to get protected but in reality they’re getting a compromised dose.”

The CDC tells providers to mix a vial of Pfizer’s vaccine with 1.8 mL of a saline-based solution for adults. The lawsuit alleges Centers Urgent Care instructed distributors to mix with 1.9 mL, which allowed the company to squeeze seven shots out of each vial as opposed to six, the lawsuit claims.

Future deliveries of the vaccine from Pfizer were based on how many people the company had vaccinated in prior weeks, said Zheng, who sued in Queens Supreme Court .

Private providers who administer the shots are reimbursed for vaccinating individuals through insurance companies or Medicare.

Zheng is the second employee of Centers Urgent Care to sue over the alleged practice. Andrew Palazzo says in his suit filed last year that he was fired from his job administering the vaccines after raising similar objections as Zheng. He alleged 16,000 doses could have been diluted.

A court denied Palazzo’s bid last year for an order blocking the site from administering vaccines. Palazzo’s suit is ongoing and Centers Urgent Care has denied wrongdoing.

Mayor Adams benefited from his chief of staff's LLC dirty money

 

 THE CITY

In 2018, seven employees of two medical companies in New Jersey began donating thousands of dollars to the campaign treasury of then-Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams.

They worked for two companies — Ridgewood Diagnostic Lab and Interstate Multi-Specialty Group, both in Hackensack, and owned by Dr. Alexandr Zaitsev, who was among the Adams donors.

They each gave what was then the maximum amount, $5,100, or close to it, to the campaign account for Adams between April 19 and Nov. 29, 2018, Campaign Finance Board records show.

At the time, Adams had not officially declared he was running for mayor.

Ridgewood, Zaitsev and two other of the Adams donors are now defendants in a lawsuit filed by GEICO in September 2020, with the insurance company alleging they and other medical groups billed GEICO for more than $4.5 million in fraudulent claims.

The lawsuit filed in Brooklyn Federal Court and first reported by Bloomberg News, also lays out the two medical companies’ connection to Adams chief of staff Frank Carone, who was a part owner of two limited liability corporations that helped finance their launch.

The employees donated $40,600 to the campaign by the end of 2018.

They were all later refunded more than half of the money after the Campaign Finance Board made changes to the maximum amount for donations when a candidate takes part in a matching-funds program.

GEICO’s lawsuit alleges that Carone, along with his former law partners, father and son Howard and Jordan Fensterman of the firm Abrams Fensterman LLP, used limited-liability companies to advance money to Zaitsev and other medical companies as they waited for insurance claims to process.

After fronting the money, the LLCs would be paid back with interest when GEICO paid the no-fault claims, the company alleged in its suit.

The companies that fronted the cash to the medical groups, Financial Vision Group LLC and others with similar names, are owned by Zaitsev and Daniel Kandhorov, according to court documents.

Kandhorov, who lives in Queens, could not be reached for comment.

During his mayoral campaign, Adams opted to take part in the new 8-to-1 matching-funds program — which allows $2,000 per person, with city-funded matching dollars for New York City-based donors.

A spokesperson for Adams, Max Young, said that Carone had nothing to do with the contributions from the mostly Jersey-based donors.

“Mr. Carone was a passive investor in these LLCs, didn’t solicit these donations, never met the donors in question, and had no knowledge that they donated, then or now,” said Young in a statement.

 

Diverse discrimination

NY Post 

A controversial new city law that will allow non-citizens to vote in local elections would unconstitutionally bolster the political clout of Hispanic and Asian New Yorkers — at the expense of African-Americans, according to a new lawsuit.

The suit, filed Wednesday in Staten Island Supreme Court by longtime political commentator Deroy Murdock and three other black New Yorkers, claims the City Council violated the 15th Amendment by approving the measure in December with the “discriminatory intent” to strengthen the voting clout of some racial groups over others.

“The Foreign Citizen Voting Bill accomplishes precisely what advocates intended: shifting the electoral power in New York City municipal elections along racial lines to Hispanic and Asian voters and reducing the power of other racial groups,” the suit says. 

J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a nonprofit representing the plaintiffs, said the process of getting the new law passed was “infested with racial motivation.”

 The suit claims former Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez (D-Manhattan), who sponsored the bill that later became law, has publicly said he drafted it with the intention of “increasing the power” of some racial groups.

This is the second suit challenging the measure, which became law last month. Last month, local Republican elected officials filed legal papers arguing that under state law only US citizens can participate in the city’s elections.

Real estate firm and big bank swaggers back at Adams

 

Brooklyn Eagle

A lawsuit has been filed in federal court challenging New York City’s sweeping mandate requiring nearly all private-sector businesses to ban unvaccinated employees from the workplace, asserting that the city’s attempt to control the coronavirus pandemic deprives tens of thousands of businesses from pursuing their livelihoods.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday contends businesses like Cornerstone Realty, a Staten Island real estate firm that is the only named plaintiff in the case, are being unduly forced to fire unvaccinated workers and asserts the city’s vaccination edict lacks mechanisms for businesses to appeal.

“This case is not about vaccines, but about an employer’s right to be heard,” the lawsuit states.

The edict was one of two-term Mayor Bill de Blasio’s final acts before relinquishing his office at the end of the year. He set a Dec. 27 deadline for virtually all private sector businesses — roughly 184,000 businesses that employ hundreds of thousands of people — to require workers to show proof that they have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Businesses face fines of at least $1,000 for noncompliance.

The city’s new mayor, Eric Adams, has been in his job for less than a week but must immediately confront myriad challenges posed by COVID-19, including the latest surge that has spiked the number of infections to record levels.

It remains to be seen how Adams will respond to those challenges and what measures put in place by his predecessor he might keep or jettison as he formulates his own pandemic policies. Before taking office, Adams affirmed his support for the vaccine mandate, as well as de Blasio’s insistence on keeping schools open.

While acknowledging the turmoil the pandemic has wrought on small businesses, Adams made no mention of the mandate in his remarks during a visit Tuesday to a struggling small business in Manhattan, where he signed an executive order that he said would “slash red tape, reduce needless fines and penalties,” and would “bring relief to our heartbroken entrepreneurs.”

 

NY Post

Chase Bank has shuttered more than three dozen branches in the Big Apple as the mega-bank struggles with staff shortages and vaccine mandates amid a surge in Omicron.

While the COVID variant has shelved many JP Morgan Chase employees, at least one local pol blamed the bank closures on “prohibitive” city and state mandates that require private-sector workers to be vaccinated before they can show up for a day at the office.

“It doesn’t give business an opportunity to open the front door,” City Councilman Joe Borelli, a Staten Island Republican, told The Post.

“If we want to re-populate our offices in New York, this mandate is a prohibition on many of those people coming back,” Borelli said.

Borelli also took to Twitter Wednesday to make his point, posting a photo of the laminated signs that adorn many closed branches.

“I don’t think the mandates are working in #nyc,” he wrote.

“Our branch is temporarily closed due to New York City’s COVID-19 Workplace Vaccination Order,” the sign on the door of one branch reads.

Rent gouging developer behind latest luxury public housing tower in Jamaica

Queens Chronicle

Adjacent to Rufus King Park in Jamaica will be a new housing complex valued at $110 million, on which Zara Realty, a real estate firm that provides apartment units in Queens and Long Island, is expected to break ground very soon.

Ismael Leyva Architects and Monadnock Construction designed the project and are based in Manhattan and Brooklyn, respectively, according to the housing provider. The building will be energy efficient, have 223 units and a state-of-the-art HVAC system, nine stories and 218,000 square feet.

The apartment complex will be located at 153-10 88 Ave., a two-minute walk from the park, according to Google Maps.

The apartments will be studios to two-bedroom units with energy-saving appliances. Thirty percent will be affordable homes, while the remainder will be at market rate, according to Zara Realty.

The building will have a solar roof capable of producing 69 KW, a 169-space valet parking garage that has 10 electric vehicle chargers, a 1,272-square-foot fitness center, a 3,167-square-foot recreational space, a 5,449-square-foot roof terrace with gardens and seating areas and storage units.

There will also be a 6,480-square-foot community facility space on the ground floor.

“Manhattan has Central Park, Brooklyn has Prospect Park, and the beautiful and historically significant Rufus King Park is an absolute jewel for the people of Queens,” said Tony Subraj, co-managing partner for Zara Realty, in a statement. “Our company’s ethos centers on quality, well-located buildings that are a complementary part of the community. This has been a key part of Zara Realty’s success for the past four decades.”

Despite the company’s endeavors — it owns at least 2,500 rent-stabilized units in 45 buildings in Jamaica alone — it was hit with a civil suit in 2019 for allegedly charging thousands of low- and middle-income tenants with illegal fees and rents or requiring them to sell illegal leases, according to a 52-page complaint from Attorney General Tish James.

The real estate firm or affiliated entities have allegedly “spent years evading and circumventing rent stabilization laws in order to scam tenants out of thousands upon thousands of dollars,” said James.

Renters were allegedly asked to pay for keys, room reservations, advance rent and excessive security deposits that were three to four times the monthly rent, according to the complaint. Some tenants allegedly paid upwards of $11,000 simply to move into a rent-stabilized apartment.

Zara did cooperate with the Tenant Protection Unit and the Division of Housing and Community Renewal to resolve any issues deemed “potentially unlawful involving rent regulation” but said that some allegations made in a civil suit were “inaccurate.” It also lost a bid to dismiss the lawsuit in 2020, according to the therealdeal.com, a real estate news outlet.

Tenants displaced by Jackson Heights apartment building fire sues LLC and the city

 

THE CITY 

More than 60 of the hundreds of tenants displaced after a massive fire at a Jackson Heights apartment building in April are now suing the property’s owners and management, as well as city agencies.

They’re demanding that the building’s owners repair their homes so they may return — and let them back in soon to retrieve possessions from the still heavily damaged and inaccessible block-long complex.

The building remains surrounded by scaffolding and caution tape, with many windows boarded up. The eight-alarm blaze crumbled ceilings and destroyed interior walls, exposing wooden beams in their place.

Tenants allege that in the five months since the fire, Kedex Properties and city officials have provided little sense of when repairs will be completed, if any belongings can be salvaged and when residents might be able to return to their apartments.

Access to the building has been “unreasonable and severely limited,” according to the complaint filed Sept. 10 in Queens Housing Court targeting the owner, along with the city Department of Buildings and Department of Housing Preservation and Development.

Several dozen tenants in one wing of the two-address, 133-unit building have been allowed scheduled visits to retrieve personal items. but former residents of more than 60 apartments in the other wing have not been granted that same privilege, said Andrew Sokolof-Diaz, the building’s tenant association president and a plaintiff in the suit.

“We have exercised our rights as displaced rent stabilized tenants to bring this lawsuit forth after so many delays and denial of access to our own belongings,” he added. “Our goals remain the same: to mitigate our displacement from home in Jackson Heights and to protect what salvageable belongings we have left inside while ensuring we have a dignified and sensible timeline for repairs until we are able to return.”

Legal Aid attorney Amee Master, who is representing the tenants, said the landlord is required under state law to repair the building promptly.

“Kedex Properties can no longer ignore its obligation to undergo the necessary work to ensure the building is safe, habitable, and up to code for the residents to return,” Master said.

Kedex Properties declined to comment.

It took less than 2 days...

 

 

NY Post

A group of restaurants and businesses have filed suit against Mayor Bill de Blasio in opposition to a mandate requiring proof of vaccination at city eateries, gyms, movie theaters and other establishments, new court papers show.

The businesses argue that the mandate violates their constitutional rights and unfairly targets certain establishments but not others like churches, grocery stores, schools, offices and medical facilities, the lawsuit filed Tuesday in Staten Island Supreme Court alleges.

The suit says that the mandate is “arbitrary and capricious” for a slew of reasons including that the highly contagious COVID-19 Delta variant can spread among both vaccinated and unvaccinated people, the court documents claim.

The mandate also doesn’t accommodate certain exceptions for getting vaccinated such as those who’ve already gotten the virus; those who are allergic to ingredients in the vaccine; those who have pre-existing conditions that make getting the vaccine risky; and those whose religious beliefs stop them from getting it, the filing argues.

“The decision to get the vaccine should ultimately lie with the individual and his doctor, who knows that persons’ complete medical history, rather than a politician,” the court papers claim.

Further, emergency orders have been in effect for almost two years and instead of easing off, “the mayor implemented even more arbitrary executive orders, trampling more recklessly on constitutional rights,” the suit charges.

The mandate also threatens people’s livelihoods, making it “impossible for anyone who chooses not to be vaccinated for whatever reason, to work in the designated industries,” the court papers claim.