NY Times: Silver under investigation for ties to East River tax cert lawyers

SheldonSilverThe New York Times is reporting that Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver is under federal investigation for “substantial” unreported income from the tax certiorari firm that has represented East River Housing Corp for many years.

According to the article, Silver has received money from the firm Goldberg & Iryami for over a decade without disclosing that information on financial disclosure forms as required by law. It is not known what work Silver was being compensated for.

Goldberg has represented East River and Hillman, as well as many other properties on the lower east side, for the purpose of lowering property tax bills. Firms such as these typically receive from their clients a percentage of the reduction they win from the city.

The Times cites unnamed sources “with knowledge of the matter.” They printed no comment from the FBI, the US Attorney, or Speaker Silver.

It’s not too late: maintenance office will help distribute holiday gratuities

Board president Gary Altman’s memo two weeks ago listing the many staff members who work at East River was a help for those of us who want to show our appreciation around the holidays — but without photos to go along with the names you may not be able to give a tip to everyone you’d like.

I’ve been told by whoever answers House Committee emails that if you drop an envelope at the maintenance office with a staff member’s name on it, they will make sure the right person gets it.

Furthermore, the House Committee will continue to explore at their next meeting how to more easily and equitably distribute holiday gratuities. If you have a suggestion, you can email ERhousecommittee@aol.com.

Questions answered by board prez

Two cooperators have forwarded answers they received from board president Gary Altman to questions they posed at last week’s annual meeting.

Tommy Loeb asked how much of this year’s $723,710 for “legal and audit” was billed to pursue dog owners and defend against the federal lawsuit against the coop. Here’s the answer from Altman:

I wanted to follow up on your question at the annual meeting regarding legal expenses spent on dog litigation during the past fiscal year. The amount is approximately $575,000. It is expected that our insurance company will reimburse the Corporation for a substantial portion of this amount.

In addition the New York State Division of Human Rights will be forwarding a $60,000 check by the end of the month in recognition of their settlement and agreement that they were wrong in re-instating and continuing certain actions against the Corporation in these matters after the Supreme Court had ruled in our favor.

Stephanie Aaron  asked about the line item for “Stationery, printing and office supplies” this year listed as an expense of $57,106. Here is the answer Altman sent her:

I wanted to follow up on your question at the annual meeting regarding the line in the financial report entitled ‘Stationery, printing and office supplies.’

This line which the independent auditor creates and names includes the following items & approximate expenses for the management, maintenance, security and boiler room staff:
– Office Supplies, $12,500
– Postage, $15,000
– Dinner Allowance for 32BJ Workers, $7,065 (required under our Maintenance Department Union contract)
– Xerox Machines, $8,950
– Stationery & Printing, $12,700
– Computer Expense, $750.

Thank you! (from Lee, Peter, Heather, and Don)

Dear Neighbors,

This year’s campaign at East River was unlike any other, with more engagement from all around the coop. More than 950 cooperators voted in person or by proxy, hundreds more than we’ve seen in years. No matter who wins an election like that, more participation is a big win for all of us.

Many of you knocked on doors and talked to neighbors about the challenges we face — that’s the best way to make sure that our board is accountable to our concerns.

Some of you explicitly collected proxies for the four of us, or handed out flyers from Cooperatively Yours, helping to consolidate our strength and establish a network that will continue to encourage communication.

Others voted for the first time, or the first time in years, and committed to our long-term goals of strengthening the coop’s financial security and sharing ideas and information with openness and respect.

You’ve shown what we can accomplish when we work together. Thank you all so much for your support, your suggestions, and your valuable time.

Cooperatively yours,

Lee Berman,
Peter Herb,
Heather Hubbs,
& Don Mathisen.

Annual meeting recap: food fight!

Monday’s annual meeting was very well attended and lively. The usual order of business was amended by a vote from the floor to move the Q&A to the front of the agenda which gave time for more questions while the auditorium was still full; the questions were interrupted to introduce the candidates for board and house committee and allow for voting at 8:40, and then resumed at 9:00. By 9:45 the president Gary Altman, the manager Harold Jacob, and the House Committee chair Jeffrey Super gave their reports. The meeting was adjourned shortly before 10:30.

(I apologize for not taking particularly good notes, but I can paint in broad strokes what was raised, and hopefully some of you can fill in the details as comments below.)

  • The first question was about the federal discrimination lawsuit the coop now faces — particularly, how much have the coop’s lawsuits against dog owners and defense of the federal case cost us? Legal fees can be seen in our annual report to have skyrocketed, but how much of that can be attributed to the dogsuits? The corporation council Ezra Goodman answered that because the case was open there was very little he could say about it; Mr. Jacob answered that because some of the legal fees will be repaid if the coop wins, and some penalties may be covered by insurance if we lose, that an accurate number is not available.
  • Another question pertained to upcoming capital expenses — why does the coop not provide in the annual report an estimate of future repairs and replacement? Mr. Jacob answered that there are no expected major capital expenses for the next ten years; he said the roofs are 25-year roofs with expected 35-year lifespan, the elevators do not need replacing, Local Law 11 brickwork was completed last year.
  • One cooperator asked about why a problem she had with her pipes had been so badly handled by the maintenance staff. She recited a list of dates and times when the staff had been unresponsive or uncooperative. Bob Prescott, the head of maintenance, explained that the problem she had had was a time-consuming one to fix, and apologized for the bad service she received.
  • Another question (from me) was about the use of and revenue from our common areas and commercial spaces. I asked if, in order to determine whether more outside revenue could be raised, management would put release a comprehensive survey of square footage, income, and usage of all the areas available for lease or common use. Mr. Altman said it would be considered.
  • There was a question about the parking lots — had anyone explored the possibility of adding spots either by installing lifts or redrawing the lines in a more efficient way, or by leasing space on Delancey right under the bridge. Mr. Altman said that those various options had been explored in the past and, for various reason, had all been found lacking; therefore, there is no plan to increase parking capacity.
  • One cooperator had a different maintenance issue, with the windows used to enclose her balcony. She had been told that a particular contractor was the only one authorized to do the job; that contractor had done sub-par work and was now no longer in business to make necessary repairs. Shulie Wollman from the management office explained that the policy of requiring certain contractors was no longer in effect.

You might assume from the above paragraphs that the evening was a dry and uneventful affair. In fact it was as rowdy and bawdy as burlesque. There were catcalls and curses from the audience, pantomime and storytelling from the stage, and a constant buzz of barely contained hostility. At one point Mr. Jacob, interrupted again by a cooperator, asked in frustration, “Why won’t you let me talk?”

“Because I don’t like you!” he was told.

Mr. Jacob replied, “That’s the first honest thing you’ve ever said.” Later he characterized that kind of hate as “what ISIS does.”

So you get the idea.

Every year I’m equal parts amused and disgusted by the show. Of course it’s fun to watch people you know in a food fight: it’s messy and meaningless. But our bad behavior has consequences. Straightforward questions are met with pre-emptive obfuscation, honest answers are called lies, and instead of getting together once a year to solve common challenges, too many people are just trying to land a blow. So we all walk around here for another year as though it’s us vs. them, holding it in until next year’s annual meeting when we do it all again.

Let me know below what I missed, and what you think we can do to make next year different.

Results on hold — recount next week

A RECOUNT has been requested by one of the candidates, so final results will not be known until next week.

The turnout — both in person and by proxy — was the highest anyone can remember — close to 1000 cooperators participated.

The unofficial count tonight indicates that LEE BERMAN and PETER HERB, along with Michele Amar and Dov Goldman, should be congratulated — but because the difference between 4th place and 5th place is so small, we will all have to wait to know the final outcome.

For house committee: Joseph Hanania, Jeff Super, and Ellen Renstrom won election. That result will not be subject to recount.

Strengthening our financial security (from Heather Hubbs)

Neighbors,

First let me apologize for not attending Meet the Candidates last week. I had been looking forward to the chance to participate, and had even pushed a business trip back two days in order to be in NYC that evening. Unfortunately, my 2-year-old son fell ill after I came home from work and I didn’t want to leave him even for a couple hours. I hope you can understand.

I was glad to hear that there was consensus among all candidates about the need for a reserve fund, which would not only contribute to the coop’s financial security but also minimize the impact that large upcoming capital expenses will have on our own personal finances.

But there are other financial matters that we need to address in order to ensure the coop’s strong footing. Our coop ran a deficit in fiscal years 2011 and 2012, and we were bailed out in 2013 only by a sharp uptick in flip tax revenue. In fact, we rely more and more on the flip tax every year, even though it is the most volatile revenue source we have. We need to find more sustainable ways to balance our budget with new sources of revenue.

We also need a better handle on costs like our out-of-control legal fees. Legal fees are up 462% since 2011 — this year we spent more on legal fees than we did on 24-hour security. Had legal fees not skyrocketed, we would now have an additional $1.25 million — a good start to a meaningful reserve fund.

I’m confident that with new forward-looking directors focused on financial security we can ensure that no resident is priced out by unexpected assessments. If you agree, I would be proud to have your vote.

Best,

Heather Hubbs
heather.hubbs@gmail.com

PS. If you can’t make it to the annual meeting on Monday — or even if you’re just not sure — sign a proxy to make sure your vote is still counted. If you’re supporting Lee Berman, Peter Herb, Don Mathisen, and myself you can download a proxy online and deliver it to the apartment indicated on the form.