WNYC - Brian Lehrer covers the debate over A Chinatown Business Improvement District - click here to hear the AUDIO Podcast of the program

CLICK BELOW to hear the PODCAST provided by WNYC

Originally aired 11:30 am Dec. 8th 2010

WNYC has the INCORRECT recording on their website.

HERE is the correct recording which aired on Dec. 8th. <--click

Eric Enquist of Crainsnewyork.com is a political reporter for Crain's New York. At the end of this piece he diminishes (quite irresponsibly) my comment about bill # A11672, as a "red herring". Although Mr. Enquist is entitled to his opinion, keep in mind that HE's not going to be paying MY rapidly escalating BID fees attached permanently to my property tax assessment with no way out.

After calling The Comptroller's office Monday Dec. 6th, I learned that John Liu is not going to comment on #A11672 with regard to how it relates to prevailing wages (which his office sets for NYC Government workers) and Business Improvement Districts - not because the bill makes no mention of BIDs, but because it simply hasn't been look at it that context. To diminish this bill in any way is foolish because even without the bill making it into law, the unions are already scrutinizing wage practices of BID contractors which puts a whole new spin on how everyone is going to pick up the trash from now on.

Daniel Massey of Crainsnewyork.com reports the story THIS WAY:

"In a new wrinkle to a larger legislative dispute that has festered for months, building-service powerhouse 32BJ SEIU has filed a complaint with New York City Comptroller John Liu alleging that the Union Square Partnership business improvement district is covered by existing prevailing wage law and has been underpaying workers by more than $14 an hour.

The union says it bases its argument on interviews with workers and a copy of the BID's contract with the city, which it obtained via a Freedom of Information Law request. It has requested contracts of BIDs across the city to evaluate whether they too might be in violation of the prevailing wage law.

In the complaint, the union alleges workers employed by BID subcontractor Atlantic Maintenance Corp. are paid as little as $7.41 per hour. The hourly prevailing wage for office cleaners in the city is $21.80, plus $8.36 in benefits; for security officers, it's $11.75, plus $4.46 in benefits.

“Well-funded BIDs have no financial reason for cutting costs on the backs of working New Yorkers,” said a 32BJ spokeswoman. “And some may be violating the law that prohibits tax dollars from being used to finance poverty-like jobs.”

Dan Biederman, chairman of the BID Association, an umbrella group representing the city's 64 BIDs, said the complaint is the latest in a series of “ongoing lobbying efforts” by 32BJ surrounding a prevailing wage bill under consideration in Albany that would end exemptions for public utilities.

A spokesman for the Union Square Partnership said in a statement that the BID's sanitation workers are represented by Amalgamated Industrial and Toy and Novelty Workers Local 223 and that a new contract went into effect July 1. “Atlantic Maintenance negotiated a comprehensive, fair and mutually agreed upon compensation package through a collective bargaining process that includes wages ranging from $8 to $14 per hour, paid vacation, and health coverage,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Liu had no comment."

Click here to hear Phil Grossman -Coalition Against the Chinatown B.I.D. re: complaint filed with LMDC against Chinatown Partnership LDC

On November 10th 2010 Phillip Grossman, an attorney representing the Coalition Against the Chinatown B.I.D. sent a letter to the Lower Manhattan Development Committee alerting them to what amounts to be a "Grossly wasteful expenditure of your $5,400,000.00 Clean Streets program-grant", by the Chinatown Partnership Local Development Corp. The Coalition's complaint is based on an analysis of the "Partnership's" 990 forms which are required for non-profits to file with the IRS. CPLDC's 990 form 2006 2007 2008 that The Coalition Against the Chinatown BID obtained through a "Freedom of information Law (FOIL)" request, since the Chinatown Partnership does NOT post their 990's on their own website, is a serious point of contention for years by business and property owners in Chinatown.

Click here to hear a podcast of Mr. Grossman's testimony.

The letter reads as follows:

PHILIP J. GROSSMAN

ATTORNEY AT LAW

NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10013

November 10, 2010

Lower Manhattan Development, Corp.

One Liberty Plaza

New York, NY 10006

ATTN: David EMIL, President

Re: Grossly wasteful expenditure of your $5,400,000.00 Clean Streets program grant to CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

Dear Mr. David Emil:

I represent various local property owners and the groups known as the coalition of Business And property owners, and The Coalition Against The CHINATOWN B.I.D., in connection with this complaint to your agency. The local property owners whom I represent, and whom are affiliated with the above-mentioned groups, have been adversely affected by the gross waste of the $5,400,000.00 clean streets program grant to the CHINATOWN PARTNERSHTP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP.

In support of our complaint of grossly wasteful expenditures, I enclose our "ANALYSIS OF CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CLEAN STREETS EXPENDITURES under AGREEMENT #: M07-571* For PERIOD FROM January 01, 2006 to June 30,2009, with supporting schedule and documentation. Our analysis is limited to the period from January 01, 2005 to June 30, 2009, because financial statements for the period

after June 30 , 2009, are not yet available from the CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP.

The basis of our complaint, is that based on the above described analysis of financials for the period from January 01, 2006 to June 30, 2OO9 in which the CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. expended $2,025,352.00 of your agency's clean streets program grant, it appears that only $633,608.00 was actually expended on street cleaning and maintenance, which is only 31.3.percent of the total funds expended for the period.

Furthermore, under: the 8/I/2008 addendum to the contract between the CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. and the street cleaning sub-contractor BLOCK BY BLOCK (copy attached, ) the parties to the contract agreed that the sub-contractor BLOCK BY BLOCK, would be reimbursed for it's street cleaning management personnel, and which reimbursement in fact did occur. See copies attached of BLOCK BY BLOCK invoices.

Page 2 of 2

Therefore, in view of the fact that the street cleaning sub-contractor Block By Block was managing Chinatown street cleaning crew, it is astounding and amazing that, the "CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. expended $583,266.00* on management personnel, out of total expenditures of $2,025,352, for the period from January 01,2006 to, June 30, 2oo9, or 28 percent of the total fund expended for the period.

Furthermore local property owners, and. store owners, have been damaged by the gross waste of your agency's street cleaning grant by the CHINATOWN PARTNERSHIP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP., in fact they have not derived the full benefit of your agency’s street cleaning grant, as only 31.3 percent of the grant was actually expended on street cleaning and maintenance.

Therefore, we respectfully request that your agency investigate, what appears to be, a gross waste of the clean streets grant money by the CHINATOWN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORP., and we also respectfully request that you seek recoupment, of what appears to be,

grossly wasted grant money.

Philip J. Grossman

Lower Manhattan Development Corp., One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor,

York, NY 10006, ATTN: Avi Schick, chairman Board of Directors

*The Chinatown Partnership Local Development Corp. at one time had a staff of four, and currently has a staff of only two. The Executive Director's salary for several years has been over $100,000.00 annually. The cleaners hired by Block by Block number only ten people.

Click here to hear an audio podcast of local resident Geoff Lee speaking about a proposal for a Business Improvement District in Chinatown

Lifelong resident and small business owner Geoff Lee speaks at Community Board 3's public session at P.S. 20 on the lower East side. The Chinatown Partnership Local Development Corp. presented a proposal for the formation of a Business Improvement District (BID) for Chinatown, which they have been trying to gain support for over the last five years.

Click here to hear an Audio Podcast of The Coalition Against the Chinatown B.I.D. at CB3 11/23/10

CLICK THE PHOTO TO ENLARGE

The yellow marks on this map indicate clearly that the historic core of Chinatown has a united front against the formation of a Business Improvement District.

On November 23, 2010 at P.S. 20 on the Lower East Side, The Coalition Against the Chinatown Business Improvement District (BID) presented to Community Board #3 over a hundred names of businesses and property owners (primarily in the historic Mott Street "core" of Chinatown) who have signed on against a Chinatown Business Improvement District and read a letter to the Board asking them to deny approval of a Chinatown BID.

"The Coalition Against the Chinatown BID" provides the list of businesses and property owners submitted to the Community Board by writing them at info@nochinatownbid.org.

Materials produced by the famous Rubenstein Public Relations firm state that The Chinatown Partnership Local Development Corp. has 97% of their returned survey forms are in favor of a Chinatown BID.

The Coalition Against The BID, meanwhile, submitted a map clearly showing the core of Chinatown is solidly united against the idea of a BID for Chinatown.

Comm. Board 3 Full Board 11/23/10 hears community critiques of Chinatown Partnership - B.I.D. proposal

CLICK HERE to hear an audio podcast of lower east side native, tour guide and activist Rob Hollander regarding the proposal of a Chinatown BID. Hollander feels the CPLDC has "done an end run past the Chinatown Working Group".

On November 23rd 2010 Community Board 3 heard a presentation by the Chinatown Partnership Local Development Corp.. The presentation was meant to highlight the reasons why Chinatown needs a Business Improvement District (BID) and why "The Partnership" (CPLDC's BID Steering Committee) should ultimately be responsible for the formation of a BID.

The public session had several speakers voicing their opinions about why Chinatown should not have a BID.

The CPLDC's presentation was not followed a vote. The next presentation by the CPLDC will be before the Economic Development Committees of both Community Boards 2 (Dec. 9th) and 3 (in a month from now). The CB3 economic development committee will then vote on whether the BID issue will go forward to the full Community Board for a final vote whether or not to endorse the Chinatown BID. In 2002 Community Board 3 voted to DENY approval for a Chinatown BID, with many of the same BID supporters of 2002 on The Chinatown Partnership LDC such as Bill Lam of Longines Property development and Asian Americans For Equality. The reasons for denying a BID were "deception and obfuscation".