State of SoHo

At a recent meeting in SoHo, the not-so-silent minority in Downtown politics celebrated a small success at the Pomegranate Gallery. The focus of the this mini-celebration was the fact that a local shop, Greene Street Antiques, had taken up residence at 76 Wooster Street - the location where multiple bar/restaurants have attempted to set up shop. There were a number of applicants who fought to ensconce themselves in this quintessential SoHo location but were turned down at the Community Board or were fought vigorously in the courts. From upscale restaurants to art bars-cum-nightclub/lounges, the applicants kept coming and the SoHo irregulars fought them off.

Among those sipping a glass of wine and partaking of the food was Caroline Keating, Sean Sweeney, David Reck, Barry Mallin and his wife, and others too numerous to mention.

The gallery was alive with appreciative residents who felt that "something" could, and was, accomplished by a band of not-so-young artists and art lovers who want to preserve the essence of what SoHo once was and is still supposed to mean -- which is not new condo developments, high-end boutiques and trendy eateries. Art is the purifier and the Bohemians are still with us. Just a little more politically savvy.

The owner of Pomegranate Gallery, fittingly, is a man by the name of Oded Halahmy, who represents Iraqi artists. The intensity of his love of art is matched by political views on how the opportunity for peace has been missed by the current regime in Washington.

There is no secret that Downtown was among the first to ridicule Bush and the embarrassment he has become for Americans with any gray matter left. The tragedy of 9-11 has affected us most and yet, despite the fact that war has been waged in the name of our fallen firefighters, police, EMS workers and victims, it is Bush's war - not ours.

The agenda in Afghanistan was questionable; the agenda in Iraq was unconscionable.

Bob Morgenthau is starting early. After winning his recent election for District Attorney, he has decided to act more like a politician than a prosecutor this time around. He has almost four years before the next election but he's and preparing early for the next contest. The question of his age is a perennial subject of speculation. And, the answer is the same. Talk to him and see if you would like to be on the wrong side of a court room with this man. Visiting him in his office is a memorable experience and chatting with him on the issues that he has pressed for - like extending the statute of limitations for rape prosecutions with John Doe indictments and convictions - is an eye-opener. He has also championed the rights and needs of children and crime victims in our city and has been instrumental in helping to track Terror money from offshore banks that use New York City as their conduit. His fortitude follows a family name and reputation that harkens to Roosevelt's New Deal - and he is still relevant.

Several real estate projects have reportedly been slowing their plans as a result of the softening market. The Belazs condo project at Grand and Broadway, known as 40 Mercer has sold roughly 50% of the apartments at prices approaching $3,000 per square foot. That project has been in the pipeline for several years and began construction in a hot market. It's difficult to tell whether the slowing market has damaged the sales of those units or whether the price of the apartments alone has done the job. And, it is even more difficult to interpret the real value of each sale. Seller concessions blur the real cost of purchases and just force the industry comps upward in an unending upward spiral.

However, a few other projects are just not starting up as consumer resistance weighs heavier. The 311 West Broadway development has reportedly seen its cost basis rise dramatically (due in part to the water table) and movement on breaking ground is not yet happening. Parking is still available at that site.

After an intensive round of community negotiations, the development at 350 West Broadway which was approved as a 13 story condo, was finally purchased by Ian Schrager to become a hotel and is now rumored to be on the block as a condos project once again. The asking price is now in the $60 million range. That's up from about $25 million less than a year ago. Well, you know, it's New York, its inflation, its SoHo baby, you gotta be in it to win it.

The real question is, who wants to be sitting and who wants to be circling when the music stops.

An insider recently made comment on the state of the Community Boards downtown.

The "Madeleine Wils" contingent on Board #1 appears to still be very much alive and has not made life easy for current Board Chair Julie Menin. There are a lot of contentious issues affecting Board #1, not the least of which is the pressure by developers to convert "as of right projects" into residential condos. The history of Board #1's internal disputes and the most recent election which ousted Wils is only upstaged by the clique who still runs Board #2.

Board Chair Maria Derr apparently still takes direction from Bob Rinaolo, former owner of the Garage Restaurant and current co-owner of Senor Swanky's and Chair of Institutions Committee at Board #2. Business transactions are not always as they seem and it appears that the "new owner" of the Garage (Rinaolo's current partner in Swanky's) has become much more political recently and fundraisers still are held there. Rinaolo remains partners with Sal Perillo in Senor Swanky's -- who is the current "new owner" of the Garage.
Apparently, Derr's campaign adviser and mentor, Rinaolo, has risen to the role of the Board #2's political advisor and, along with other bar owner luminaries such as Rick Panson and Phil Mouquinho, the direction of the Board is, shall we say, primarily business-oriented. That's the "Community" board that we are speaking about.

At a recent Full Board meeting, other Executive Committee members such as Jo Hamilton and Brad Hoylman could be seen visibly shrinking from what appeared to be a verbal battle with a community activist while the cameras were rolling.

"Why would the Chair of a Community Board fight with the community in front of cameras?" was the comment of one Board member.

"Ask Bob," was the answer.

The Political Season

Eliot Spitzer surprised no one and took the primary election for Governor with close to 80% of the turn-out, which was very light. At one point, Tom Suozzi had been the darling of the New York Times but that waned and after missing the Times endorsement, the lack of money just was too much of a hurdle to overcome. The big question for many downtown is whether Spitzer is going to shed the image of a prosecutor once he moves into his new office. A lot of old-timers were reticent to support his candidacy despite his successes in bringing Wall Street to its knees. Or, at least digging deep into its pockets to avoid prosecution. Spitzer certainly has the gray matter to make it work -- it's just a question as to whether he will govern like a Clinton or a Teddy Roosevelt. A Governor with a big stick is not an appealing image.

Mark Green had also gotten the endorsement of the New York Times but unlike Spitzer, went down in flames with a superior organization supporting Andrew Cuomo. Fundraisers held by Cuomo were very smooth events and Mario was always around to shake hands. Green may now have a tough time maintaining a presence and being taken seriously for a major public office after losing the mayoral race and now this one for Attorney General. Some attributed Green's loss in both elections to not taking the "high road." Among those responsible for the usual dubious, subterranean antics was rumored to be none other than the ubiquitous PR operative Allen Roskoff -- who was a "consultant" to Green's campaign.

Hillary was, predictably, a shoe-in -- but did get a run for her substantial amount of money. Her adversary Jonathan Tasini did make a decent showing, however. The downtown crowd has been less than thrilled with Clinton because of issues like the conservative Death Penalty and Iraq War positions. For some, she looks more like a Republican in Mr. Bill's clothing. While many hope that there is a Democrat on the horizon to take back the Oval Office, she has more vulnerabilities than one would have liked to see this early on.

Martin Connor successfully beat off the attack by Ken Diamondstone for State Senator and much of SoHo was happy about it. Senator Connor had scored a major victory in the contest between Nightlife forces to have "all bars all the time" throughout SoHo and the community -- by helping in the effort to reform and reconfigure the S.L.A., or at least help sharpen its sensitivity to residents wishes.

Apparently, Arthur Schwartz, Chair of Parks, Waterfront & Open Space at Community Board Two, has managed to pull a rabbit out of the proverbial hat. After years in political semi-oblivion, he has resumed his community board role with a passion and recently knocked off Larry Moss as Democratic State Committeeman. Considering the fact that Moss was supported by City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, State Senator Tom Duane, and Assembly Member Deborah Glick, it was no mean feat. While Schwartz's win will have no affect on their political careers, there is no doubt that they will be miffed at his ascendance. Of course, while State Committeeman is of dubious political value -- you can work hard to make it count. After having recently had quadruple by-pass surgery, Schwartz has shown remarkable resilience. The political win, however, was rumored to have personally cost him nearly $80,000.

Deborah Glick has had no competition and was not challenged in the Primary. She will be re-elected to the Assembly. However, she recently learned that the gossip column piece which appeared a couple of years ago was not off the mark. The Page Six piece reported that Maria Derr was rumored to be thinking of running for the same seat that her uncle Bill Passanante had held and abandoned to Glick's challenge. Derr originally had denied the rumor -- which, of course, is the way ideas are tested in the political arena. It seems that Derr had recently been making the rounds and seeking advice about the wisdom of challenging Glick -- and was told to forget it. Clearly, that is now more of a possibility for the future -- given that Derr will now have two years as Chair of Community Board Two under her belt. Derr has weathered a lot of criticism for her association with the Nightlife faction on the Board but so far Glick is far and away the more community-oriented of the two. Glick has come down hard on the oversaturation of bars in lower Manhattan and Derr, who once ran the Business Committee which approves liquor licenses and was elected with Nightlife support on the Board, has been antagonistic to residents trying to clean up their communities.

Speaking of bars, the owners of Lola scored a victory at the Appellate Division. The controversial Bar/Restaurant/Cabaret that has been trying to graft itself on to SoHo for last couple of years -- got the Appeals Court to reverse the lower Supreme Court decision which canceled the S.L.A. license. With enough twists and turns to give SoHo residents indigestion (after spending $30,000 in legal fees), the Lola matter just keeps on going. Essentially, the truth is that Lola did not win the right to a license. The Appeals Court sent the matter back to the S.L.A. to state a reason why the granting of a liquor license is in the public interest.

The "old" S.L.A., before Boyle took over as Chairman, was a Pataki group of Republican political hacks that cared little about downtown. But, as a result of the community movements, partly due to the efforts of Zella Jones and Sean Sweeney, political storms enabled the transformation of the S.L.A. into a more community-friendly panel.

So, the "new" S.L.A. denied a Beer & Wine license that Lola applied for during the long Appeals Court deliberations for a full liquor license. Now that the new regime at the S.L.A. is getting the liquor license issue back before them again, the community is making known their displeasure with Lola. In addition to the fact that there are at least 17 bars with 500 feet of this proposed establishment -- PR efforts have been leveled at any and all activists who have been fighting the application.

And, despite that fact that some pretty nasty accusations have been leveled by parties on both sides of the aisle, few people can avoid the fact that a cabaret on Watts Street where 3 lanes of horrendous Holland Tunnel traffic blocks intersections -- is a bad idea. This feeling is shared by residents who had the audacity to turn down an offer by Lola's owners to permanently seal off their windows -- so that the 4 a.m. closing hour with live entertainment would not keep them awake. Now there's an offer you can hardly refuse. Especially if you've paid a couple of million dollars for your loft apartment.

The race card has also been prominently been played by the applicant. Not wanting the cabaret has been widely played as discrimination. Page Six has been enlisted by Lola's PR machine which has given lip-service to this phony racial theme. The SoHo Alliance was criticized and false information was spread around. Sleeping at night, somehow, does not seem to be a black or white issue. Unless, of course, you want a liquor license. Anything that works has been tried -- including the harassment of community activists. Private investigators had been hired and tracked residents who oppose this bar in a relentless effort to discredit anyone in their way. A community should not have to endure this just to fight one bar. Talk about discrimination?

Contact S.L.A. Chairman Boyle, Commissioner Healey, State Senator Connor, Assembly Member Glick, Councilman Alan Gerson, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Mayor Bloomberg to make your feelings known about this issue in SoHo.

And, speaking of Sean Sweeney, he has been the recipient of the latest in a round of "smear" letters leveled at activists who criticized the Community Board, the Nightlife lobby, and political cronyism. Only this one isn't anonymous -- or is it by the same hand who wrote the last one? An attorney by the name of Shanahan wrote, or allowed to be written on his stationery, a 3 page letter appearing to be a "Cease and Desist" letter -- stating that Sweeney essentially has been nasty to Maria Derr, Chair of Board Two, and threatening to obtain an Order of Protection. It has been confirmed that Maria Derr hired Shanahan to represent her in this matter. The basis for Sweeney's alleged faux pas ostensibly is that he criticized Derr for her role as attorney for the Estate of Arty Strickler (deceased Board #2 manager) and acting as Chair of Community Board Two while allegedly trying to obtain $27,000 from Board Two coffers for the Estate. Of course, the problem with such a letter is that one attorney writing a letter to protect another attorney who is fair game as far as criticism of an elected official is concerned, hardly needs an "Order of Protection." Protecting Maria Derr from Sean Sweeney is a little like protecting Winnie the Pooh from Donald Duck. It's a ludicrous concept -- in reality as well as fantasy. The letter, consequently, is ridiculous on its face and calls into question the sanity of the writer, not to mention his client.

Interestingly enough, there are so many wild accusations and threats of legal retaliation in this letter, not to mention passages that call to mind someone ready to burst into song about being gay, that one has to question its real message. Is it really about Sweeney "threatening" Derr? Curiously enough, while the letter has been cc'd to several downtown politicians, we could not confirm anyone having recieived it. The Post Office isn't that bad. As Sweeney remarked,"phony accusations and hollow threats like this just give attorneys a bad name and it emboldens me to fight harder for what I believe in for the community's good."

This not-so-anonymous letter to Sweeney is curiously similar to the "anonymous letter" crafted by the Nightlife people and cirulated by PR operatives like Allen Roskoff (who, incidentally, is a friend of Shanahan), and the Board #2/Chamber of Commerce/Bar crowd. As another downtown activist put it, the messages have been -- "we will relentlessy smear and attack you if you don't back off. We have the money and the contacts and we will bury you for standing up against us (Derr) in favor of the community."

That is also the real message to Sean Sweeney; the message to the community; and, is also the oblique message to Borough President Stringer -- for having had the guts to begin the difficult process of reform on the Community Boards. And this message is coming directly from voices at Community Board #2.

What is the response going to be to this organized assult on the community?

That's the real question.

SoHo Security

Or, how I learned to live with the bomb.

The most recent proof that Homeland Security is keeping us safe is the D.O.T.'s recent refusal to allow the gift of planters partially sponsored by Bloomingdale's to be placed around SoHo. The planters, each one dedicated to a fallen 9/11 Fireman, were to have been placed around SoHo to beautify and lend some sense of foliage to our concrete arts Mecca . In spite of the love that the city professes to have for SoHo -- as Lady Bird Johnson once suggested -- we need to plant "a tree, a bush or a shrub to beautify".... SoHo.

However, as Joshua Simons of the Crosby Street Block Association has learned, the D.O.T. apparently considers the planters a "bomb threat."

Just exactly how a planter with the inscription of a dead fireman who gave his life for that tragic event could be considered fodder for yet another terrorist attack leaves one incredulous. The local chapter of Al Qaeda seems to be more interested in large targets rather than designer lofts with Bosch appliances.

Or, is there another explanation for denying SoHo the planters.

A simpler one may have leaked out of the lower rungs of the D.O.T. when it was learned that Commissioner Iris Weinshall, Chuck Schumer's wife, lives across from Prospect Park and doesn't like planters. She has a point. Planters really are not a good substitute for grass, trees and flowers.

But Iris, can you bring us some grass, trees and flowers? At over $1000 a foot, we can't even get weeds. We'd love some rolling meadows too! It's just that, well, can someone bring them to us - like, now? We'd be happy to give up our planters.

So, what has been passed along to us as a security protection smells suspiciously like a personal predilection on the part of a City Commissioner. It must be nice to be a Commissioner who gets to decide what all of the little people are permitted to have in their lives.


The heat has been turned up on the City over the Trump development at Spring and Varick Streets. The Trump people insist that the hotel/condo will be built - a 45 story residential tower in a manufacturing zone. The Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, GVSHP, insists that this is not a permitted use in a manufacturing zone and that this project perverts the use and variance system and defeats the zoning process. While a hotel is "as-of-right" in a manufacturing zone, residential use requires a variance. Thus, transient hotel use is permitted while long term residential use is not - unless a plan comes before the community and becomes subject to its comments, suggestions, modifications and approval process. What is as stake here is the foisting upon a downtown community of a huge mega-structure without review, comment or modification that would normally be subject to the carefully negotiated zoning structure. We have a huge new structure with a high density of tenants, perhaps families, and no social net to absorb them. Mr. Trump, you build buildings but do your planners have any interest in what becomes of the community or your new tenants once you have moved on? What about schools, what about the parking crisis, and, forgive us, but what about the silly concern about light and air?

The City has not yet issued permits to the Trump people, but they have not agreed to meet with Andrew Berman of GVSHP either. Our guess is that the bureaucrats are trying to figure out how much heat they will have to take if they give this project the green light without consulting with residents. Right now, Berman is putting their feet to the flames but they are dragging them nevertheless. If you object to this project, contact the City.

The Dog Days

These are the lazy, dog days of summer yet there seem to be rumblings of thunder coming from the DOI and DA's office as the aftermath of those investigative subpoenas looking into records at Community Board #2 continues. There were rumors afloat that there was some connection between the Pier 57 fiasco after it was learned that Cipriani pulled out of the "Leonardo" development team leaving Witkoff, et al, seemingly holding the bag-- and the defeat of Berlusconi in the Italian election as a possible connection. Unseemly allegations flew.

But it turns out that aside from continuing application woes of the Pier 57 development team, the investigation appears to be focused upon the history of the Oceanarium proposal that was submitted several years ago as part of the Pier 40 RFP. Despite the fact that the applicant was defeated by the Korman bid (and then all were rejected by the HRPT), both DOI and the DA are apparently delving into allegations of wrongdoing in that area.

Several sources have confirmed that James Ortenzio, former Chair of the HRPT, Republican County Chairman and consultant for the Witkoff Group involved with the Pier 57 proposal -- has had interviews with both investigative agencies and is rumored to be trying to avoid an indictment. The rumors are that both agencies are investigating a connection between the Oceanarium effort and money changing hands to keep the Pier 40 application viable during the year of 2003.

Arthur Schwartz, Chair of Parks, Waterfront and Open Space at Community Board #2 has stated that contrary to comments implying that he was close to Ben Korman are incorrect - and that he (Schwartz) had, in fact, sued Korman in order to secure more interior space on Pier 40 for ball fields. Thus far, there have been no rumors that Schwartz is a target of this investigation and he has been very active during his recuperation from quadruple by-pass surgery only two weeks ago.

Speaking of Waterfront matters, Julie Nadel, member of the HRPT Board recently re-appointed by Scott Stringer, is now also a member of Community Board #1. In a swift elevation, Julie has been chosen to head the Waterfront Committee by Board Chair Julie Menin. It looks like Nadel will be THE person to talk to on Waterfront matters. Here's wishing her luck in her latest assignment.

The success of the Town Hall meetings and the Summit, which was organized by Zella Jones of the NoHo Neighborhood Association, Sean Sweeney of the SoHo Alliance and at least a dozen other community organizations, has apparently been picked up by the press - and the politicians. The New York Post recently published an article giving credit to Speaker of the City Council Christine Quinn and Mayor Bloomberg for bringing the issue of bar over-saturation to the forefront. But, from the community's point of view, safety is only a narrow view of the problem. According to one activist....

"....Safety is the wrong issue. Solving it leaves the real problem -- that nightlife proliferation undermines community -- untouched. The nightlife issue needs to be viewed in the context of community displacement, away from narrower problems of safety. The problem is the nightlife strip: strips raise commercial rents driving out commercial diversity and small businesses; strips attract young and transient residential tenants who care little about noise and community, who drive up residential rents especially under the new rent (de)regulations which contain new means to pressure older tenants out. The only solution to the community displacement problem is the banning of nightlife strips -- some revision of the 500 foot rule." -- Rob Hollander (LESA)

Making matters worse for some activists, not only is safety the wrong guiding issue but Quinn's office is planning on having the Nightlife Association be in charge of inviting the attendees to this "Summit." One activist described this as being akin to placing the fox in charge of the chicken coop.

Listen guys - downtown has been screaming about this saturation of liquor licenses issue for a few years. Between the violence and the "wild west" antics at certain bars, the noise and the "zoning by fiat" when neighborhoods are changed with too many bars and lounges - wouldn't it be appropriate for these elected officials to give some credit where credit is due? And, invite the community to the meetings?

Where were these powerful elected officials when the smear campaigns, lawsuits and anonymous letters were being spread around by the nightlife operatives and undercover members of Community Board #2? Where was the Mayor's and the Speaker's wise support when the Nightlife crew at Board #2 began to retaliate against activists who were fighting bars and trying to improve our neighborhoods?

It wasn't two months ago, before the tide clearly had turned against the nightlife people, that the Daily News was printing slurs in its gossip column about Community Board members - rumored to have been placed with the aid of paid PR operatives like Allen Roskoff of the Durham Group - a close personal friend and sometimes weekend guest of Maria Derr, Chair of Board #2. Roskoff was formerly a Tom Duane employee and is currently one of Mark Green's campaign staff operatives (Green is running for Attorney General).

The Speaker and the Mayor should address the hard work of downtown people -- like Zella Jones who was sued for fighting a bar in NoHo; Sean Sweeney who was smeared and vindictively removed as Chair of the Landmarks Committee by Maria Derr because of his objection to bar proliferation; David Reck who was removed as Zoning Committee Chair by Maria Derr partly for his stand against nightclubs; and, Jo Hamilton who was removed from Board#2 for her stand against Gansevoort bar proliferation. All of them have given much time and energy to rid downtown of liquor license saturated neighborhoods where it has become too dangerous for families and children to walk about freely in the evening.

If they doubt that we have all been hard at work on this issue, they should check the archives of the SoHo Journal.

The Investigation

Just when you thought that Community Board #2 couldn't get more complicated, enter the Department of Investigation. In a rare showing of equanimity, neither mentioned nor shared with the Full Board, the Chair of Community Board #2 and its Executive Committee apparently discussed a subpoena issued for all documents related to the Waterfront Committee and its deliberations during 2003 under the tutelage of Arthur Schwartz.

While Schwartz is currently the Chair of Parks, Waterfront and Open Space -- a title that seems to convey the impression that he's calling the shots on most of the external world in CB2's territory -- he was only the Chair of Waterfront in 2003, before he was summarily removed during the "Saturday Night Massacre" by Board Chair Aubrey Lees.

Her actions were spurred on by rumors of inside deals and financial coziness. In fact, the entire Waterfront Committee was disbanded as was the Pier 40 Working Group.

The theory at that time speculated that there was too much "friendship" between the developer, the Chair, and members of the Waterfront Committee who were charged with making recommendations to the Hudson River Park Trust (HRPT) as to which selection was preferred by the community after extensive review. The Korman/Durst plan seemed to have the inside track and was ultimately selected by the community anyway but was then rejected by the Trust. Schwartz actually sued the Trust over its rejection of the Korman plan but later withdrew the lawsuit.

What bothered some people was the fact that Korman was already the operator of the parking concession (a $5 million dollar per year operation), was friendly with Schwartz and needed support from Community Board #2 to get the nod from the Trust. Durst, the financial partner of the Pier 40 development team was a member of Friends of Hudson River Park (FOHRP), a respected watchdog group that supports the waterfront and its development and Schwartz was also a member of the FOHRP Board. For some, there just seemed to be too many interlocking interests.

So, why is all of this being resurrected again now?

The Korman/Durst plan was rejected by the HRPT and since that time some beautiful new ball fields have been installed at Pier 40 at a cost of $5 million dollars. This was agreed upon by the community after extensive hearings at Community Board #2, after Schwartz's ouster and prior to the election of the current Chair, Maria Derr.

Derr and Schwartz share a law office and were mutual supporters in the Board Chair elections. And, since Schwartz is now the high mucky-muck of everything in the Board #2's external universe, including Parks, Waterfront and Open Space, he is once again poised to be in the position to make the decision regarding Pier 40.

And, guess what was just issued?

That's right rangers, the new RFP for Pier 40. The classy moniker for the HRPT's announcement that it is now again ready to receive proposals for the development of the pier. This is a bid request for a 14 acre property in lower Manhattan. Modest estimates would place this puppy in the $250 million dollar category with no problem. There's a lot of room for fuzzy thinking in those numbers.

As Yogi Berra once said, "It's Deja Vue all over again."

With the shenanigans that have lately been going on at Board #2 with the Nightlife crew who took over the Board leadership and looking to shore up its connections at the Chamber of Commerce and the Nightlife Association -- following the money is something that members of the community are a little leery about. And, with the serious effort made by the current Board leadership at character assassination -- including using the talents of PR undercover operative Allen Roskoff -- it's not surprising that the issue has once again reared its ugly head. Anonymous letters, smears against David Reck (Derr's opposition candidate in the election), and attacks heaped upon community activists - make a cogent argument for some disgruntled downtown resident to want an investigation to be initiated.

The financial report on Treasurer Roscia Sanz and Chair Maria Derr's watch has been the subject of much consternation and has caused such a stir that records have been requested by the Borough President's office as a result of their being too little, too late provided to the Full Board. The sums in that matter were in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Pier 40 RFP, controlled now by the same people, involves hundreds of millions of dollars. Somebody is uncomfortable about the situation.

Stay tuned.

Trump This

You have to give him credit. He keeps on coming.

Despite tremendous opposition to Donald Trump's attempt to develop the Spring and Varick Street parcel into a 45 story Hotel/Condo his people attended the recent Zoning Committee hearing of Community Board #2.

Of course, the Donald hasn't yet met Andrew Berman. Through the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation (GVSHP), Executive Director Berman has managed to move his focus from Gansevoort to the West Village and now onto SoHo in his mission to downzone and preserve downtown communities. Few landlords would place him high on their list of favorites. In zoning circles, he is as well known as Trump is himself.

Berman describes the Trump development as a Trojan Horse Hotel, and just as illegal as 848 Washington Street was before the Hi-line became a fact of life. His concern is that allowing an as-of-right development disguised as a "Hotel condo" - would set a precedent for further residential development in this area without having to pass through the review process normally required of such a variance application. In Berman's words it would "strip away" zoning protection in areas like NoHo, SoHo, the Meatpacking District and the Far West Village. Berman calls this development plan an "illegal circumvention of the law."

Key, of course, is taking action to prevent any kind of proposed development of this magnitude.

Substantially more than 100 residents came out to express their opposition to the plan and as a result a resolution was passed denying the application at the Community Board's Zoning Committee.

There is a long and growing list of elected officials downtown that are opposing the plan and thus far the City has not issued any permits. It looks like they might have a very big stampede if they were to do so. Opposing Andrew Berman is like fooling with Mother Nature when it comes to zoning issues.


Diether's new role as the Chair of the Zoning Committee is like Yogi Berra's "deja vu all over again." After David Reck was fired by Board Chair Maria Derr for opposing her in last month's election contest, the only Board Member left who could claim to have the knowledge of how to run the Zoning Committee was Doris Diether. Reck was unquestionably the most knowledgable and competent person on what is described as "wacky Board 2."

As a white-haired survivor of the Community Board wars, Doris Deither (at 86) is not someone to be trifled with. Like a cat dropped from dizzying heights she always seems to land on her feet. The only trouble is that she has a Conflict of Interest and no amount of sympathy for the octagenerian changes that fact. Gentle little white haired old ladies can also be wily foxes that cut corners. The most recent ruling on her private consulting work which she does for landlords and developers - whether they come in front of Community Board #2 or not - was ruled on by Borough President Virginia Fields a few years back. During the 80's Diether had been told that as long as clients did not appear in front of any Board Committee of which she was Chair (the most likely being Zoning), it would fly. However, that was changed by Fields a few years ago.

The current ruling, made by Fields, prohibits any Chair of the Zoning Committee from engaging in a business relationship with landlords or developers that go before any Community Board.


The race between Maria Derr and David Reck was widely viewed by downtown as a loss to the Nightlife people, but the lopsided rejection of several liquor license applicants shows us that isn't the case.

In fact, what was suspected by some and now appears likely is that there was a well-coordinated smear campaign that started several months before the election itself that was later augmented by a fear campaign. This secret agenda, organized with the help of political operatives like Allen Roskoff of the Durham Group - a close personal friend of Maria Derr - and supported by the Nightlife contingent on the Board (Roscia Sanz, Phil Mouquinho, Bob Rinaolo and supporters like John Maggio and John Diaz), was part of a coordinated campaign of fear and intimidation. Some members on the Board were threatened where it hurts - in the pocketbook. Particular Board members are dependent upon referrals from political connections friendly to Derr. Ray Cline of VRDC, for example, has made it known in the past that Judges dole out patronage assignments (foreclosures, probate, etc) and control purse strings in the political arena - and Board members not voting correctly would not be smiled upon if Derr did not win. Others were threatened with expulsion to the archipelagos of the Board like the Youth Committee or the LBT Committee. Still others Board members did not want to risk the wrath of a vindictive and vengeful Chair despite the Kennedyesque fiction and much-hyped aura claimed by the Passanante-Derr connection. Between the fear, the intimidation (some Board members were told to vote for Derr, Sanz, Maggio, and Diaz), the financial threat and the threat of expulsion to a political Siberia - worked.

Election speeches and articles about Community Board #2 as corrupt body were drowned out and not welcome. For the last year, and now for another year, it will be business as usual. The Chamber of Commerce and Nightlife Association will continue to run Board #2.


The Borough President's office has stepped in and commented upon the selection process for District Manager of Community Board #2 . Up to this point, the process has suffered from a lack of Sunlight. Even a flashlight would have been helpful. Maria Derr is handling the confidential legal work for the Estate of Arty Strickler (the now dearly departed District Manager), yet the selection committee seems to be suffering from the same level of privacy. The BP's office has commented that the level of disclosure emanating from the Personnel Committee which was configured to select a new District Manager -- having conducted 7 meetings and 14 interviews without reporting anything to the Board membership -- is a violation of the By-laws. All requests for a peek at the CV's was either ignored or given lip-service. Board members didn't even know who the candidates were until this past week and the vote will be held on Wednesday. It is a mockery of Democratic process and is insulting to the membership of the entire Board.

The Personnel Committee, controlled by Derr supporters (Derr, Schwartz, Sanz, Yankay) should be disbanded, the election should be cancelled and the process should begin anew -- observing the "Sunlight laws." All of the Board members, with comment from the community (which has contact with the District Manager on a day to day basis), should have access to resumes and all of the proceedings. Arty Strickler was sometimes perceived as heavy-handed and sometimes insulting to community members who wanted information. That should not be the face of the new Community Board #2.

New Beginnings

During a recent interview with Assembly member Deborah Glick, there came the unsettling realization that defending the community from encroachment on all sides is a daunting task. The path for any activist as well as a community-oriented politician (as is Deborah Glick), is risky and incredibly difficult - full of barbs and punji traps.

We spoke about a few issues that affect residents in the most basic of ways.

Housing - shelter -- is one of those most essential needs that affects all of us so fundamentally. And, anyone who depends upon the stock of rent-stabilized or rent-controlled apartments - especially in Manhattan - are especially prone to becoming targets of changes, attacks, scams, legal decisions (or indecisions), and bureaucratic ineptness, all of which can effect tenancy. Landlords are always looking for novel ways to take that rent-regulated apartment away from a tenant. Or, at the very least, multiply the rent many-fold.

Glick discussed two of the more recent attempts to deprive tenants of a place to live. One is the recently revised notion of "demolition." The accepted fact is that if a building needs to be torn down, tenants have to leave. But the most recent variation on this theme has the landlord doing a "partial" demolition for which the express purpose is evicting tenants with the help of the DHCR. Often, the current ploy of partial demolition is really a cosmetic matter that hardly meets the criteria of demolishment in any language - in Togo it might come closer to the word for Fraud. But, so far, City government is playing ball with developers. Glick feels that demolishment should be re-defined in legal terms as the total razing of a building so that this does not become a rampant new means whereby developers legally evict tenants.

Similarly, the cute little moniker "landlord recapture" has been another soon to be abused concept. Recently, a 14 family apartment building was purchased by an individual who proceeded to begin evictions against all of the tenants in the building. This Lower East Side landlord claimed that he needed space for his growing family. This novel approach, if it weren't so ludicrous, is currently being tested in the courts and could have a potentially devastating effect upon the lower and middle class housing stock in Manhattan.

Deborah Glick is running for re-election and should be vigorously supported - few of our elected officials and even fewer of our Community Board representatives have bothered to make these issues known. The City and State have done a miserable job in protecting our rent-regulated housing stock and have pandered to the development of luxury coops and condominiums. It is a short-sighted view which destroys the vibrancy, diversity, and artistic creativity of our communities.

For those architecture lovers out there, Doris Diether has put the Victorian Society's proposed expansion of the Soho-Cast Iron Historic District on the Community Board #2 agenda. The Landmarks Committee will be meeting next Wednesday, July 5th and the Zoning Committee will also be reviewing this issue. Shawn Brennan, the vice president of the Victorian Society, will be presenting the proposal which was described here a few weeks ago. For those of you who have any interest in the possible changes, here is a first-hand opportunity to see what may be in store for SoHo.

The dust has settled, the axes have been buried, and the invectives have all been hurled at Community Board #2. The election between sitting Board Chair Maria Derr and Zoning Committee Chair David Reck was widely anticipated and closely watched by residents, Board members and several politicians for a number of reasons.

For one thing, Derr has been closely associated with the takeover of Community Board #2 by the Chamber of Commerce and Nightlife pro-business, pro-bar faction on the Board. Derr was their successful representative to which she added the Passanante name. While her uncle Bill was liked by many old-timers in the Village, he meant nothing to residents of SoHo or Hudson Square and apparently Derr was rumored to be not all that close to him either - until it became politically helpful.

Maria Passanante Derr, as she is now apparently known, won the election handily. And, while there were dirty tricks (is this not politics?), she gave a great speech and handled herself with composure and even-handedness throughout the election evening.

She even permitted a second vote on an issue due to the fact that some Board members were in a hall outside the voting chamber -- which turned out to negatively affect a liquor license issue. Unusual for her previous behavior. Was it a good show, or was it a new beginning?

Despite the fact the old Bill Passanante was considered a bag of wind by some; a little suspect by others; a prescient crusader for gay rights by others still -- and despite the fact that Carmine DeSapio was also a relative and a politician but was not mentioned - Maria did well. She now stands on her own. She no longer needs old Bill or Carmine and she should dispense with that questionable baggage.

So, what does this mean for SoHo, which counts for nearly a third of Community Board #2 -- but is represented by less than half of that in voting privileges?

Not much.

An political insider has speculated that the vote was indicative of a core group of bar-owners wishing to hold on to control of the Board and also those who owe fealty or who are afraid of them; then there are the Greenwich Village historicals (not to be confused with GVSHP), and those who mistakenly believe that Passanante equals Kennedy and Camelot.

And, then there were those who just liked Maria Derr better than David Reck.

Reck is a fighter who has been aggressive and passionate. He delivered a strong, sobering message - that the Board has lost its direction and that those outside of the Board speak disparagingly of the way the business of the community is being handled.

Derr's message was smoothe and conciliatory. She spoke of change and spoke of the need to move on and put negativity and divisiveness behind. She cited what she believed to be changes on the Board that had already been made in favor of the community.

Neither of them could hold a candle to Lewis Black, but then again, this isn't supposed to be stand-up comedy even if appears to be. And, there wasn't a funny comment all evening - until Phil Mouquinho joked about losing all three of the contentious licenses coming in front of his committee.

Unfortunately, that was the one funny remark that wasn't funny.

The message gotten from this election was not that many Board members are afraid to vote any way but the way they are told (for Derr), on pain of losing their financial connections and Board status;

It was not that the Board membership can now sit back for another year and wait for Brad Hoylman to bring some balance back to Community Board #2;

It was not that the Nightlife contingent on the Board managed to threaten, smear, or distort their way into buying another year of control.

It WAS that the activists on the Board, along with newly appointed members, have forged a new alliance. There is now a new bloc of voters on the Board who see issues first and foremost from the perspective of the Community. It was a portentous change that augurs well for all of us. And, it was apparent as well in the spirit of change evident at the Quality of Life forum held at the Puffin Room this past week. Zella Jones of the NoHo Neighborhood Association, Sean Sweeney of the SoHo Alliance, the new Commissioners of the SLA, the police brass and numerous elected officials and their representatives were all in attendance. Significantly, there were representatives of 26 community organizations from lower Manhattan at this "Summit."

There is a new working alliance forged between members of Community Board #2,the community organizations and the political structure of City government to effectively deal with Quality of Life issues.

The new S.L.A (State Liquor Authority) had two of its three members at the Forum, Daniel Boyle who is the Chairman and Noreen Healey -- a new member and resident of Brooklyn Heights, is both a former prosecutor and a Democrat. It's nice to have another woman in power as well.

Boyle is a former prosecutor who helped clean up the police corruption in Schenectady and is expected to clean out the cobwebs and anti-community sentiment at the S.L.A.
State Senator Marty Connor, who is our SoHo representative, is credited with having been instrumental in helping us get the new Democratic representative to the S.L.A. -- recommended by Governor Pataki and confirmed by the Senate. Connor's influence and friendship with Pataki has apparently paid off for Downtown. Remember that when you think about the fact that of the last ten contested 500-foot-rule hearings, seven were denied by the newly reconfigured S.L.A. Connor is facing re-election and we should support a candidate who produces for the community. We need people like Marty, especially in our fight against oversaturation of bars and support for quality of life issues.

The Forum was congenial and respectful and there appears to be a clear path towards a working relationship on the quality of our lives -- including problems with bar oversaturation, pollution and traffic. Could illegal sign enforcement be far away?

And, as for the new beginning promised in her campaign speech at the Community Board election --after being elected Maria Derr proceeded to remove her opponent David Reck as Chair of the Zoning Committee.

Some might just see that as retaliation, not a new beginning.

Elemental Democracy

It's never been said that politics is easy or always particularly honest. The long history of sub rosa deals, chicanery, dirty tricks and even murder in some cases, is the stuff of novels as well as election lore. From the Borgias to the Kennedys, from Julius Caesar to George Bush, it is a trail of misdeeds and subterfuge that is enjoyable to read about.

It's a tough business and the stakes are big. Big money, big egos and most often big power.

But, aside from the fact that almost any kind words or actions are covered under a cloak of immunity, the rules covering Community Board conduct are fairly transparent. Or, at least, they are supposed to be. As an advisory body, there is not much real power in and of its role as the representation of the will of the community. And, it is the body that represents the community - which means the residents, institutions and businesses in its area or territory.

The power on Community Board #2, which is about to have its second election in two years, is not currently vested with the community. It is centered upon a few people who are connected to the Chamber of Commerce and have ties with the Nightlife Association.

While these organizations provide valuable representation to their members, they do not represent the residents of the community in which they operate. They exist to further their own interests.

As a result, neighborhoods experience pressures from organized entities and their paid representatives who lobby for bar proliferation, expansion of institutions and development pressures that can and do overwhelm residents and activists alike. It takes a lot of hard work to thwart the investment of big money.

That is why the Community Board is so important. The will of the community can stand in the way of high pressure efforts to push aside the will of the people.

In the recent past, the groundswell of support for a more community-oriented Community Board #2 has unleashed some serious players who don't give a damn about what residents want. They are paid consultants to push a business and sometimes self-serving agenda (which is not interested in the wishes of the residents first). Members on the Board who have allied themselves with this anti-community/pro-business agenda, like Rick Panson, Bob Rinaolo, Phil Mouquinho, Roscia Sanz, John Maggio, John Diaz and until recently Mark Rosenwasser - have coordinated efforts to control the Board sometimes for self-interest. Using whatever means necessary.

While this is not surprising, the methods used certainly have been. After all, this is not supposed to be the Spanish Inquisition.

But an "anonymous" letter was circulated to smear those who opposed the wishes of community-unfriendly members. It was partially crafted to punish those who used methods of "managing" an election win - and discussed it openly. The letter was unsigned and shortly after discredited - in part due to the balanced reporting which appeared in The Villager and written by Lincoln Anderson.

Then more recently, a series of letters were circulated by Arthur Schwartz and Rick Panson - ostensibly to support the waning credibility of Maria Derr, the current Chair.

The Panson letters attacked Larry Goldberg for seeking the Board financial statement and, foolishly, attacking Councilmember Alan Gerson.

However, it turns out, that it was not just a letter by Rick Panson. At the very least, it was a combined effort by Maria Derr and Rick Panson - possibly with the help of others in that ruling clique.

Derr has admitted to this and it is now public knowledge after having been exposed previously in this blog.

Shades of the "Anonymous" letter? Don't you think?

The involvement of a close personal friend of Maria Derr's, Alan Roskoff, who has been linked to the release of the "anonymous" letter, and who is a PR character seeking to gain Nightlife Association accounts for his PR firm, the Durham Group - presents all of us with a serious issue to ponder.

Having admitted to the fact that she was involved in creating the letter attacking Alan Gerson, having been personally closely connected to Alan Roskoff, and having been closely aligned with and supported by the Nightlife contingent on the Board - is there any doubt as to how and why all of these attacks were coordinated?

This is NOT just business as usual. This rises to the level of serious unprofessional conduct, at the very least. We are all, then, subject to the wrath of outside groups controlling the Board. That cannot be permitted to continue.

Between Bob Rinaolo with his inside deals and Machiavelli fetish, Phil Mouquinho with his Conflict of Interest as Chair of Sidewalks, Derr and her complicit involvement with various letters, Panson's phony high dudgeon over Gerson's criticism of Derr, and the obsequious behavior of "Dr." Maggio - we have a cast of characters who do not have the community first in mind.

The question becomes this: do residents want a Community Board that is ruled by power-seeking group that caters to business forces - to the exclusion of the residents. And, do representatives appointed to the Board want a Community Board that silences opposition with the threat of retaliation and character assassination - by any means necessary?

It should be clear to all that these personal attacks have been orchestrated to silence opposition and that they are originated by or sanctioned by the current group of bar owners, Chamber of Commerce groupies and their PR operatives.

Borough President Scott Stringer, Speaker Christine Quinn, Councilmember Alan Gerson, Assembly member Deborah Glick are all watching this election - and have all counseled fair play and perspective. They want Community Board #2 to move forward - to an era of cooperation and fairness AND Democracy.

Let's give them what they want.

Letters,... We Get Letters.....

Donald Trump is coming. Or, it seems that he plans to do so in the near future. Apparently, the hotel condominium proposed at 246 Spring Street, is running up against some opposition fairly quickly. The 45-story building would dwarf anything nearby and would violate current zoning since it would not be a transient hotel, but would instead be a condo residence with hotel style accommodations. Hotels are "as of right" in a manufacturing zone where this would be built, but residential developments require a variance. Hotels with the ability to sell or lease the units are not permitted at all.

Andrew Berman, the Executive Director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation has entered the fray already. The Trump development is similar to the 848 Washington Street proposal that was defeated nearly two years ago and has prompted GVSHP to take a position. Letters have been sent to community leaders and the elected officials in preparation to what appears to be a looming battle.

Community Board #2's Zoning Committee is expected to hear the application as soon as this month.

Speaking of letters, recent controversies at Community Board #2 prompted Councilmember Alan Gerson to send a letter that was critical of the level of animosity on Board #2. He made mention of a number of incidences that were unpleasant reminders of the friction. The fact that its Chair, Maria Derr, invited new appointees and specifically did not invite opposition members to a "Community Board" meet and greet - was the source of some of Gerson's irritation. A political event was disguised as Board meeting.

In response to Gerson's letter, Rick Panson, Chair of the Environmental Committee, former owner of the Duplex bar, candidate for District Manager, and newly appointed Voice of the nightlife faction on Community Board #2, wrote a scathing letter attacking Alan Gerson for his "outrageous" assertions.

Alan is an institution downtown. He's a lawyer and Columbia graduate, past Chair of Community Board #2 - and just a nice guy. It was no doubt hard for Alan to send a letter that is critical in the first place. Negativity and criticism are not Alan's forte. But, since some of his appointees on the Board were among the disinvitees, he felt he had to speak. Alan was also upset over the "anonymous" letter that slandered a few activist Board members.

However, attacking Alan is generally not tolerated well Downtown. And, since Panson himself has been criticized for playing adolescent pranks at Board meetings (using spitballs on fellow Board members, for example), it's hard to understand how he became the new self-appointed "conscience" of Board #2.


But, the fun doesn't stop there.

In yet another round of letters, Panson developed another new friend, attorney-activist Larry Goldberg.

Goldberg's criticism of Chair Maria Derr's administration has come to a head over his demand for the Board's 2006 financial report, which has never been proffered by Treasurer Roscia Sanz. Goldberg had to "foil" the information in order to get it. The interchange between Panson and Goldberg is reminiscent of the old days when Board members were treated to the verbal ping-pong game between Ed Gold and Arty Strickler.

Except for one big difference.

Goldberg has been asking for a financial statement and Panson has been sitting on his high horse saying -- well, you now have it. Except, that's not quite true. What Sanz and Derr produced is a projection for 2007. No financial statement, as you may know it, for 2005/2006 has been produced so far. So, why the smoke screen?

What's missing?

Was it the fact that Arty Strickler, the now dearly departed District Manager, was pulling down $76,000 a year. And, that no one seems to remember the Board ever having approved that. Despite the questions, however, former Chair Jim Smith advised us that at least $70,000 was supported by the Board.

Or, was it that the Board leadership didn't think anyone was entitled to the information? Or, even worse, that Sanz didn't really know how to produce it?

There is no doubt in some people's minds that Strickler "worked for" certain Board members like Bob Rinaolo and those whom he supported - and others in the current mood of distraction. Those whom Arty did not like, got no cooperation or inside information - or guidance about how to handle Board matters. He was also invaluable in helping to manipulate election campaigns. And, apparently, he was well paid for this. He knew a lot of people -- on, and under the radar screen.

People like Allen Roskoff -- who has recently been linked to newly circulating negative comments about David Reck, who is challenging Maria Derr in an unprecedented challenge for Chair of Board #2. Roskoff is also a nightlife operative with a small PR outfit called the Durham Group and who is a close friend of Maria Derr. The current "dirty tricks" campaign, or rumors, attributed to Roskoff revolve around David's supposed negativity towards women (something that David's wife finds ludicrous and insulting). Of course, it is insulting. That's the point of false rumors. To insult and to undermine.
Board members have been receiving anonymous calls on the eve of a very close election -- and this campaign is starting to smell like the PR placed in the media which linked Roskoff to the "anonymous" letter at Board #2.

It also doesn't help that Panson, in his zeal to help Maria Derr's campaign -- seems to have originated his attack on Alan Gerson using a computer whose signature bears Maria Derr's name. A nasty slip-up.

It certainly links all of the players in this Nightlife V. Community election.


This Thursday, June 22nd, Board #2 gets to choose whether the nightlife people will continue to run things under Maria Derr -- or, whether the community-oriented member, David Reck, will change the course of the Board. Stay tuned rangers.

The Garden Party was a rousing success. At Pier 54, despite the threat of rain, there were at least a few thousand people. They ate the food, shook the hands of politicians like Christine Quinn, Andrew Cuomo, Alan Gerson and Mark Green, and danced. There were lots of kids, ice cream, and some "fabulous" attendees such as Empress Demi Tasse and James, who vogued for the cameras. This LGBT function has arrived politically and draws the elected officials from downtown. It's not to be missed.
Even Melissa Sklarz stopped to chat at the SoHo Journal sponsor table. She's doing well and misses Board #2 already. Well, maybe not until after the current election.

A Matter of Principle

On a recent walk through SoHo, an activist lamented that she has been devoting a decent part of her life to the fight between the community and the liquor applicant known as LoLa - a bar restaurant bistro that has been insistent upon opening in SoHo at 15 Watts Street.

The history of this case, now at the Appellate Division court - after being denied a license by the Community Board, granted a license by the S.L.A., denied a license by the State Supreme Court, and now on appeal - is a long and annoying one.

What is new about this case is not the case law. And, it's pretty clear that the community has been fighting to eliminate the proliferation of bars in SoHo. No, what is new here, are the extremes to which the applicant has been willing to go to win the case.

As described by the activist, among other tactics, private investigators have been hired to track down neighbors in an attempt to intimidate her and other activists. This, of course, comes on top of the $30,000 cost for legal fees to fight the case. And, that's the cost for fighting only one bar, mind you.

This is a wake-up call for all downtown activists and politicians -- that the nightlife people are desperate to eliminate any objection to new bars in our neighborhoods, and is an indication as to how serious the issue of limiting liquor licenses has become.

It's no news that the Nightlife Association and its allies have been working overtime to discredit activists and anyone else perceived to be an enemy of "all bars all the time." Foolishly, their thinking is that unless you can accept wall-to-wall bars in your community, you must therefore oppose any bars or restaurants. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.

Sources have recently revealed that through a paid public relations consulting entity operating under the name of the Durham Group, Allen Roskoff, has now been linked to the notorious "Anonymous Letter" which mysteriously appeared and circulated Downtown this spring. The unsigned letter, which was a coordinated effort by bar-owner members and their employees on Community Board #2, was part of a smear campaign to attack those who sought to limit the spread of liquor licenses in SoHo. It was also an attempt to strike back for an expose which appeared in the SoHo Journal. Apparently Roskoff, a P.R./political insider who prefers to work under the radar was reportedly working his contacts just as the letter surfaced. Could Roskoff have had advance notice of the fact that the letter was being written? The P.R. effort seems to have been launched for the purposes of helping to place the fraudulent letter in order to give it legs -- and, in order to satisfy existing or hoped for nightlife clients. Not to mention his friends on Community Board #2. Nasty stuff for activists to have to put up with. Roskoff is a behind-the-scenes operator who is a close personal friend Maria Derr, Chair of Community Board #2, and has contacts in several political circles.

We clearly need laws that protect our residents - or, we need enforcement of existing laws - that make it a crime to harass people with "legal" techniques such as private investigators and pressure tactics similar to debt collectors that try to embarrass. This is an issue that needs to be addressed in the upcoming "summit" with the City. For updates and information on this, contact Zella Jones at the NoHo Neighborhood Association. A follow-up to the previous Town Hall-style meeting with several community groups and the elected officials will be held on June 26th at the Puffin Room. It will be a Quality of Life Forum and should not be missed. Please note that it is by invitation only, so please make arrangements in advance.


Larry Goldberg has not been a happy camper. First he gets a letter from disgruntled Board #2 member and former Waterfront committee and HRPT Advisory adversary Arthur Schwartz, saying some not nice things about his community work, then the Villager has been less than supportive towards him, and to round things out, Maria Derr has treated him in an off-hand way after he requested a copy of the Board #2 financial statement. Larry had had enough, considering all of the hard work he's done.

As reported last week, at the last Full Board meeting, Larry asked to see a copy of the Treasurer's report and was told by the Chair that it would be available at the Board office. However, since that was not the case, Larry requested it again - and got only a list of deposits and checks. Not a financial statement.

So, after all of the shuffling and scraping and no financial statement, Larry did the only thing that a serious activist-attorney could do - he sent Derr a FOIL request.

Yes, folks, in order to get the information which the Board is required to make available to its members - Larry Goldberg has had to FOIL Community Board #2 for the information. Hopefully, there will be compliance and we can find out if the accounts have been handled well under Treasurer Roscia Sanz' management.

The Conflict of Interest matter involving Chair of Sidewalks Committee Phil Mouquinho has been bandied about by several Board members and is misunderstood by some.

The COIB has ruled, as it did with Bob Rinaolo when he was Chair of Business, that one may not be an owner of a business (bar/restaurant) and also Chair a committee which approves or renews a license for that business. Essentially, it has nothing to do with how good (or bad) a job the person is doing on the committee. It also makes no difference whether or not the person recuses himself, as Mouquinho has. Prior to taking that position, as Chair, he was advised that if he were to bring his own application in front of the committee - he could not be Chair.

This is a matter of Board policy, a matter of record, and a matter of prior rulings by the COIB.

Of course, the rules may only apply to some of us.

SoHo Flux

Real estate is still healthy in SoHo, so much so that Ian Schrager is buying what was supposed to be a 13-story condo. Instead we will have yet another hotel at 350 West Broadway. Besito's, the location where a contentious "Latino" bar/restaurant fought for a liquor license -- which seems to have been responsible for the still lingering divisiveness at Community Board #2, -- was recently the scene of several fistfights between owners and relatives and now has a "For Lease" sign on its front door. The former condo, now to be a hotel, is across the street from the former Besito's and is down the block from two other recently closed bars. Felix is still in operation down the block and still drags furniture out onto the street and allows patrons to drink on the sidewalk. But, what's a little carousing on the sidewalk among friends.

Until, the hotel opens.

Then, West Broadway might be the focus of a little cleaning up. Time to get the drunks off the street and make sure that the perennial flooding at Grand and West Broadway gets some long-awaited City attention. Funny, how big money starts to bring community concerns into focus. Too bad the artists didn't get more of that attention.


Which brings us to the point about real estate. Apparently, some people have awakened to the fact that only one side of West Broadway has achieved Landmark status. The east side of West Broadway and all of its cast-iron buildings have been protected for years (one of the reasons why there are no billboards on that side of the street) - but now there is a move afoot to landmark many of the buildings which do not have such protection. Several buildings along the west side of West Broadway are now being considered for a new thrust at landmarking them. We'll keep you posted.

And, in case you have been wondering, West Broadway has few restaurants with outdoor cafes. Paris likes them. SoHo doesn't. That's partly because of the fact that no meaningful action has yet to be taken to control the vendors that gobble up sidewalk space - so residents have consistently come down against allowing tables for diners on the sidewalks. The theory behind this is that pedestrians might want to be able to use the sidewalk once in a while. While there are several restaurants that do have outside tables, such as Barolo or Cipriani's, they are essentially not permitted.

Speaking of sidewalk cafes, much ado was made awhile back when Bob Rinaolo was Chair of the Business Committee on Community Board #2 and it was pointed out that for a bar owner to be passing judgment on other applicants for a liquor license - should be viewed as a potential conflict of interest. Especially, when Rinaolo's own licenses would come up for renewal while he was Chair of that committee. It clearly would have appeared to be a conflict.

The issue became quite heated at times and after about a year of waffling on the part of the then Borough President Virginia Fields, it was decided that Rinaolo had to go. Of course, he only moved to a different slot on the committee - but at least it didn't smell as bad when all of the other liquor license holders were calling the shots - as they still do today - under the guise of independence, with Diaz as Chair. The Chamber of Commerce and Nightlife people still firmly control the committee and Diaz steps to the music when it becomes necessary. It's just not all as obvious.

However, one must question whether the Sidewalks Committee of Community Board #2 whose Chair is Phil Mouquinho does not suffer from a similar potential for conflict of interest. Considering the additional business that a restaurant can enjoy at the expense of City real estate, is it proper for a liquor license holder who is seeking to add a sidewalk cafe to his own business - be Chair of a committee that approves such a sidewalk permit? Even if the Chair recuses himself from voting, should the members of a committee who are chosen by its Chair (yes, folks, the Committee Chair and the Board Chair agree upon who is on the committee) - should those committee members be expected to objectively make an independent decision in voting upon such a permit? This particular permit is not in question here - the real or imagined conflict is.

The Nominating Committee of Community Board #2 has made its decision as to which they feel is the best candidate for the next Board Chair and other positions. Seven members were selected by the Board to handle the delicate task of reporting their findings to the rest of the Community Board.

Now bear in mind that the Nominating Committee is a vestigial body - its real function is usually to warn the rest of the Board that they had better vote as suggested if they want to keep their committee assignments. This year's Nominating Committee was elected with the help of the colorful floor antics of Rick Panson, former owner of the Duplex and current hopeful for District Manager. He is a vociferous campaigner for Maria Derr and Company and is a jovial court jester who roots for the bar owners and their supporters. His suggestions for the Nominating Committee were well taken and all of his candidates were duly elected. Will Wieder, an activist and respected member of Community Board #2 became the Chair of that august committee. The committee did its work and reported to the Board that it recommended Maria Derr as the best-qualified candidate for Chair. No surprises here.

But, when Wieder was asked whether any other candidates were interviewed - since David Reck is also a candidate for Chair of the Board - he answered that no one else was interviewed. Why? Because the By-Laws do not require it. Require, is the operative word. With a straight face, augmented by vocal support from Shirley Smith, Wieder told the Full Board that there was no need to interview any other candidates. No pretense of Democracy here on this Board and not even any embarrassment over the fact that it's missing.

So, one would ask, who wrote the By-Laws, Joseph Stalin?

Lastly, don't expect a full accounting of Community Board #2 finances anytime soon. There's been a bit of waffling on that score. Seems that Chair Maria Derr promised that a financial statement for Board #2 was available at the Board office. As it turns out, though, after Board Member and attorney Larry Goldberg had questioned its very existence, what has been prepared and disseminated by Treasurer Roscia Sanz is a lot less than one would have desired or expected. While it seems unlikely that anything untoward has transpired, the evasiveness about what's been going on with the money is troubling.

Joseph Kennedy's contemporary Joe Kane once said "In politics you have no friends, only co-conspirators."
And Harry Truman said, "If you need a friend in Washington, buy a dog."
Machiavelli, that adolescent politician from the Renaissance, would have learned a few things at Community Board #2.

The Community Board and Democracy

As we all deal with the Imperial Presidency, supported only by roughly 31% of the populace, many of us have come to cherish Downtown institutions that have historically been democratic and humanistic in their political views. However, there are political trends that would have us veering off in the direction of the conservative GOP mindset. At several levels of community politics, there is a real danger that closet Republicans among downtown politicos are trying to have their way with us.

Take Community Board politics, for example, which has a mandate to serve the community and is subject to "sunlight laws." This loosely refers to the principle that everything should be on the table, not under the table -- and that Board business should not be firmly in the grip of an elitist clique. However, recent Board #2 policy announcements have begun to sound suspiciously more like orders. Statements by Maria Derr, Board #2 Chair, have also clearly begun to sound downright dictatorial - especially those statements which direct members of the Board not to be privately meeting with and talking to community groups.

The reasoning behind this prohibition? That community board members might try to claim that they can control how the full board votes and ergo -- imply that they can influence the vote on certain important issues. Of course, anyone who believes that Community Board #2 could be subtly influenced or forced to vote any way on an issue, hasn't attended any recent shouting matches.

While it is not impossible that an errant Community Board member might foolishly believe that he or she could control a Full Board vote, one would have to assume that a neighborhood association or group of community activists could be duped by promises to steer things a certain way. Activists are not stupid people - and they certainly know how Community Board #2 functions.

So, what would be lost in prohibiting any Board member from talking to and discussing any potential agenda issue with members of the community, speaks to the very essence of Democracy. Community Board members must be free to discuss any issue -- after clearly and simply explaining that they do not represent the Full Board when expressing an opinion. But, they must be free to discuss any issue. At a Full Board vote, any member who has been in contact with community members and groups should simply state that they have had such meetings. Before the vote takes place.

With regard to people who have recently become Community Board members, a prohibition against freely talking with other members of the community is no different from telling members of Congress that they cannot discuss political issues with their constituents. That's nonsense.

The real danger here is the cloak of secrecy beginning to shroud Community Board #2 matters. The Imperial Presidency seems to have cloned an Imperial Chair and control seems to be the order of the day. Community politics is robust and contentious theater which allows for the confluence of ideas and opinions to play out on the stage. It is not something to be stifled or controlled and a Community Board is about the focusing of many ideas - not the pronouncement of the Controller of a Board's reins.

As an example of the misguided secrecy, there is the issue of the Board Manager position. After the death of Arty Strickler, a colorful figure who ruled from the District Manager position for many years, a vacancy has opened up for that position. So far, however, the process of selecting a replacement for that pivotal job has been anything but transparent. According to sources, there have been at least 50 applications for a job that will reportedly pay roughly $60,000 a year. But only 3 of the 50 applicants have been reported out of the selection committee and none have been identified. The selection process of who is being considered is murky, at best. The lone high profile applicant who is closest to the ruling clique on Board #2 is former bar owner and part-time court jester, Rick Panson. He certainly doesn't need the money after selling the Duplex, but in the political game it is who you serve and who serves you that matters. District Managers often surreptitiously control how the Board functions. His control of the Board #2 office would officially hand control of all Board functions, on a long term basis, to Business interests inside and outside of the Board.

There also seems to be a redundancy of members among the Nominating Committee for the upcoming election, the Committee handling the selection of candidates for District Manager, and the preponderance of Executive Committee members who now run the Board. In other words, a handful of people like Bob Rinaolo, Roscia Sanz and Chair Maria Derr are running the show and making the decisions - for everyone. Currently, they are the controllers. And secrecy is becoming more and more the norm. The Sun is definitely not shining on Board #2.

David Reck, the community-oriented candidate for Chair of Community Board #2 reports that there were some unhappy faces at a recent Executive Committee meeting - among those who were beginning to feel a little uncomfortable over the Imperial quality of answers to questions - none of which gave you that open and informative, democratic feeling.

The race between David Reck and Maria Derr for Chair of Community Board #2 should be interesting.

Recent rumors have it that Bob Rinaolo is removing himself from his position as Secretary, and Carol Yankay is leaving as 2nd Vice Chair. John Diaz, currently Chair of the Business Committee and appointee of Rinaolo and Derr will run for the 2nd Vice Chair position, Roscio Sanz, bar/restaurant owner and real estate mogul will remain as Treasurer, John Maggio, the eager Nightlife and Maria Derr supporter will run for Asst. Secretary and Arthur Schwartz will run for 1st Vice Chair.

Yes, folks, this will round out the Chamber of Commerce/Nightlife slate.

Derr and Rinaolo approved of Schwartz's running against Hoylman and Derr shares a law office with Schwartz. Enough said.

Schwartz is rumored to be dropping out of the ill-advised State Committee race which is planned with Lisa Cannistracci (although Schwartz denies this) - and will be challenging Brad Hoylman for 1st Vice Chair. The Deborah Glick, Larry Moss, Rachel Levine ticket is clearly unbeatable and Schwartz has realized this in time. But, one would imagine that Brad is less than thrilled over this turn of events. Schwartz has hit the ground running and has issued a letter attacking Larry Goldberg and tangentially David Reck, as well. This is a follow-up to the Anonymous letter that infected the Board a few months ago. Schwartz has become the policy arm of the Nightlife crew on Board #2, seeking a political stance after being summarily dropped from other, more visible political positions. Is he planning on attempting a run for Board Chair next? That's the usual intention for the 1st Vice Chair.

The jury is out on Schwartz's handling of the newly merged Parks and Waterfront Committee. There is considerable talk about splitting it again into two committees. And, the handling of that committee has been the subject of various levels of criticism. Recently, much of it has been focused on the Christopher Street Pier, local residents and the "Fierce" gang. Borough President Stringer has reportedly been weighing a move to step in and try to resolve the enmity himself, as a result of the drifting effort.

Holyman has been positioning himself to run for Chair within the next couple of years, putting him in line for a City Council race - and part of his neutral image (straddling the fence between the Community and Nightlife forces on the Board) has backfired. Schwartz's running for 1st Vice Chair is a slap in Holyman's face with the approval of Derr and Rinaolo. Schwartz had been dumped by Quinn and Duane in favor of Hoylman as District Leader - and it is also a rejection of Brad by the Derr, Rinaolo, Sanz, Maggio, Mouquinho group who offered him the 1st Vice Chair slot (positioning him for his own Chair run in two years). Between Holyman and Schwartz, it's now blood sport. And, blood sport is more of a Schwartz "no-holds-barred" political vendetta than Holyman is familiar with. The $64 question though, is whether the Community Board members should have to put up with more personality contests. It obscures the business of making decisions for the community's welfare.

Hoylman has done a good job as Chair of Traffic and Transportation Committee and has held his nose judiciously, while dealing with the anti-Community people still in power, and this is his reward. It is a good indication of how well you can trust the people who are "controlling" Board #2 right now. Stay tuned. The election nominations come this week (May 18th) and the election is held in June. Oh, and the fact that Rinaolo is not running for the Executive Committee is likely a ploy to continue to control the Board from behind the scenes. He advertises his affection for Machiavelli and has maneuvered the Board membership well with the help of the previous Borough President Fields, the Chamber of Commerce, the Nightlife association and an assortment of other bar owners that have packed the Board. The Anonymous Letter, which was circulated to defame certain opposition activist Board members, as well the recent attack by Arthur Schwartz attempting to smear Larry Goldberg (a Trust Board member and activist lawyer who supports David Reck's candidacy) - could not have happened without Rinaolo's tacit approval and consent as well as a green light from Derr. Rinaolo is de facto Chair of Board #2 and Derr is his political mouthpiece.

So, stay tuned rangers - we shall soon see whether the Community or Nightlife Association runs Community Board #2.


The Trust Board of the Hudson River Park is considered an honorable political appointment. There are 13 members -- 5 appointed by Pataki, 5 by Bloomberg, and 3 by Stringer. Clearly the Trust is overwhelmingly Republican and clearly it is controlled by a conservative agenda. The HRPT has accomplished some amazing things along our waterfront and where there were derelict piers, there are now places for children to play and for adults to exercise and entertain.

Recently, however, there has been a proposal among the Trust Board members to limit the information that is "leaked" to the community. It is a little too reminiscent of what we have all come to know as a "gag order." In a bid to create a new ethics code, Trust Board members are being asked to vote on rules that would prohibit discussing HRPT business with the community. The proposed terminology reads:

"Trust Directors shall avoid any unauthorized ex parte communications concerning a pending matter and avoid comment about such a matter outside the Trust Director's
official duties."

It's the wrong message to give the community and we should express our unhappiness about implementing such a rule among the Trust members. The Community has a right to know what is being discussed and what the Trust has in store for us. The so-called conflict of interest in discussing HRPT business plans with the public, is window-dressing for another veil of secrecy that takes community comment further away from discussion about the issues.

Beware the Imperial Presidency, the Controlling Community Board Chair, and a Secretive Trust. It's not simply a matter of civil rights, it is a matter of our right to know and approve or disapprove of how are lives are to be lived.

Downtown Political Contests

There has been some gnashing of teeth Downtown over the upcoming contest for State Committee slots. Usually, there isn't much to talk about since State Committee is more important in appearance than in substance. Not so this year. Voting on the part of this year's State Committee members will result in deciding who gets on the ballot this fall, an important election in which Democrats, so far, are expected to turn a lot of Republicans out of office.

Arthur Schwartz, Chairman of the Parks and Waterfront Committee of Community Board #2 is running on a slate with Lisa Cannistraci, a new Board #2 member and owner of the Chick Inn. The opposition is incumbent Larry Moss, current Democratic State Committeeman and Human Rights Watch lawyer, and Rachel Levine, an outspoken advocate of same sex marriage and other progressive issues.

Behind the curtains, of course, is where the fun is.

Cannistraci is a relative newcomer to politics Downtown, has just recently joined the Community Board and is a close friend of the new Chair of Board #2. Arthur Schwartz, a union lawyer who was deposed from the Waterfront Committee on Board #2 by Aubrey Lees and then was placed back in that slot with its expansion to include Parks by Maria Derr. However, while he has been riding a bucking political pony at the Community Board, the local electeds, Tom Duane and Chris Quinn -- gave Schwartz the heave-ho as District Leader - preferring the company of Brad Hoylman instead.

Larry Moss, on the other hand has had his own problems with the support of the Downtown clubs. While the Village Independent Democrats are likely to support Moss and Rachel Levine, it is not clear which way the Downtown Independent Democrats will line up. There have been "difficulties" between Moss and D.I.D. President Sean Sweeney and it is unclear as well if David Reck (District Leader) is thinking more positively towards him these days. It is doubtful that D.I.D. would support Schwartz/Canistraci.

And, it is unclear which way Village Reform Democrats are leaning in this race.

It seems likely, regardless of how the clubs line up, that Duane, Quinn and Glick will be supporting Larry Moss and Rachel Levine. Thus far, the major support given to Schwartz and Canistraci is from Maria Derr, Chair of Community Board #2. With that kind of political support lined up, it seems clear which candidates have the best odds.


The Community Board #2 election is no longer a forgone conclusion. Usually, in the second year of a two year run, the Chair of the Board gets a free ride. At this Board, of course, anything is possible. So, this June, we get to watch it all again.

Most recently, Derr ran and won with the support and campaign management of Bob Rinaolo, someone who had considered running for Chair but was compromised with a conflict of interest scenario involving the Business Committee. Plus, there is the pregnant issue of bar owners running community boards -- still a hot, unresolved issue. Rinaolo, a bar owner, supported Derr, who has made good use of the Passanante name and managed a lot of support from Virginia Fields when she was Borough President. They gave good fundraisers.

This year, however, in the middle of Derr's two year run, she is being challenged by architect David Reck, Chair of the Zoning Committee of Community Board #2. The split on Board #2 has been especially rancorous due to the Bar Business vs. Community issue. Reck is an activist that has supported and established community groups to fight bars, lounges and nightclubs which have wreaked havoc in SoHo, NoHo, Greenwich Village and Hudson Square neighborhoods.

His thrust in opposing Derr is that the Community Board representing these neighborhoods is basically off course. While some would say Board #2 is mired in self-serving, self-interested, sub Rosa insider deals which has basically benefited the Chamber of Commerce/Nightlife takeover of the Board at the expense of the Community - Reck has simply used the ship off course analogy. Others would say that Board #2 is more like a hospital ship that's on fire, soon to sleep with the fishes . Derr has been busy, along with her mentor Bob Rinaolo in hurriedly interviewing the new appointees to the Board in an effort to read them the riot act about the upcoming election. No doubt they are getting the new party line about how community-friendly the current slate of bar owners and associates have become. And, oh, by the way, which committee would you like best?

Reck has promised that he will take his candidacy to a vote regardless of how difficult or contentious the campaign gets. There is no doubt that his is a difficult task. Reforming Community Board #2, with its deeply rooted penchant for attacking and defaming opponents, is a tough road for any activist to travel.

While the Chair of any Board has little real political power, Derr has the machinery to operate in trying to hold on to her seat. The appearance of power is sometimes enough to sway new Board members in their voting.

Even if it's against their best interests. Or against the best interests of the community.