BY STEPHANIE GASKELL, DAILY NEWS, November 26th 2008
A Brooklyn pastor was forced to resign Wednesday because he opposed a massive development deal backed by a powerful Democratic assemblyman, opponents of the project claim.
Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio "pressured" the Rev. James O'Shea to step down from Our Lady of Monserrate in Bedford-Stuyvesant, his backers claimed.
O'Shea headed a group called Churches United fighting to be included in plans to develop a 30-acre site in the Broadway Triangle section of Brooklyn, said group secretary Robert Solano.
"The bishop has thrown out Churches United's bylaws, completely overlooked the fact that we are an independent, nonprofit organization and has forced his will upon us," Solano said. "And for what? Politics, ugly politics."
Comprised of about 20 Brooklyn churches, Churches United was created in 2004 to protest what it says was an unfair bidding process during the development stages of the property, which Rep. Vito Lopez (D-Brooklyn) plans to turn into affordable housing.
The group wants affordable housing, too, but says local churches were not allowed to participate in the bidding process.
"It seems clear that Bishop DiMarzio is under political pressure to stop the Broadway Triangle opposition," said Churches United member Juan Ramos. "It is reprehensible that he would go after Rev. O'Shea - an inspiration to so many in his community - so harshly."
O'Shea could not be reached for comment.
Solano said three members of Churches United - all Brooklyn pastors - secretly met Wednesday to dissolve the organization and said the remaining members planned to take legal action.
A call to DiMarzio was not returned last night.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Now, Vito Lopez Has Warm Words for Mike the Mayor
NY Obsever, By Azi Paybarah, 11/13/08
Michael Bloomberg, who plans to seek re-election next year, is rekindling his friendship with Brooklyn Democratic County Leader Vito Lopez, who hosted the mayor at a community meeting last night.
Bloomberg was greeted with thunderous applause when he walked into the gymnasium inside the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Center, the epicenter of Lopez’s world. In front of a crowd of school children (still in uniform!), their parents, older residents and a few Brooklyn politicos, the two politely argued as to how often they agree: 98 percent of the time, or just 97 percent of the time.
Before fielding a handful of questions from the audience, Lopez introduced the mayor warmly. He lauded Bloomberg’s “commitment to education and to Bushwick, and for that alone, the mayor is a hero and should be a hero to the people here.”
The first three people to ask questions began with lengthy thank yous to the mayor.
One simply wanted to know how to thank city health care workers that got insurance for a five-year-old girl 24 hours after she was hospitalized for a random gunshot wound.
One potentially thorny question came from an older woman, Maria Gomez, who asked what the mayor planned to do about senior centers. The administration has a plan to restructure them, and possibly reduce services in some.
But after hearing the mayor’s answer--“We are not walking away from our seniors”--Gomez nodded approvingly and mouthed “Thank you.”
The entire event lasted about an hour. Once the mayor left, Lopez posed for pictures with a few people. In between photos, I asked Lopez how he thought it went.
“You saw the applause,” he said.
I asked Lopez if he thought Bloomberg has learned how to connect better with regular New Yorkers who don't live on the Upper East Side.
“He’s warmer, he’s much more gracious, and he fits right within the personality of the community that he’s at. So, today, the people here felt a lot of warmth, and they were excited. They’ll remember this day for a long time.”
He added, “I’ve met Shirley Chisolm when she first started, I knew Geraldine Ferraro. I think some people change, and the mayor has made a remarkable change and he really is extremely sensitive. If he had a little bit more time, he’d be hanging out and walking through the crowd.”
With the 2009 mayoral race right around the corner, I asked Lopez if he’d support Bloomberg, who is not in any registered party, running in the Democratic primary. To do so, Bloomberg would need permission from three of the city’s five Democratic County leaders.
“It’s all relative to who runs,” he said. Then, as if obliged, he added, “But I’m the Democratic County leader. My obligation is to the Democratic Party. That’s a judgment I will make four or five months from now.”
AZI PAYBARAH can be reached via email at azi.paybarah@politickerny.com.
Michael Bloomberg, who plans to seek re-election next year, is rekindling his friendship with Brooklyn Democratic County Leader Vito Lopez, who hosted the mayor at a community meeting last night.
Bloomberg was greeted with thunderous applause when he walked into the gymnasium inside the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Center, the epicenter of Lopez’s world. In front of a crowd of school children (still in uniform!), their parents, older residents and a few Brooklyn politicos, the two politely argued as to how often they agree: 98 percent of the time, or just 97 percent of the time.
Before fielding a handful of questions from the audience, Lopez introduced the mayor warmly. He lauded Bloomberg’s “commitment to education and to Bushwick, and for that alone, the mayor is a hero and should be a hero to the people here.”
The first three people to ask questions began with lengthy thank yous to the mayor.
One simply wanted to know how to thank city health care workers that got insurance for a five-year-old girl 24 hours after she was hospitalized for a random gunshot wound.
One potentially thorny question came from an older woman, Maria Gomez, who asked what the mayor planned to do about senior centers. The administration has a plan to restructure them, and possibly reduce services in some.
But after hearing the mayor’s answer--“We are not walking away from our seniors”--Gomez nodded approvingly and mouthed “Thank you.”
The entire event lasted about an hour. Once the mayor left, Lopez posed for pictures with a few people. In between photos, I asked Lopez how he thought it went.
“You saw the applause,” he said.
I asked Lopez if he thought Bloomberg has learned how to connect better with regular New Yorkers who don't live on the Upper East Side.
“He’s warmer, he’s much more gracious, and he fits right within the personality of the community that he’s at. So, today, the people here felt a lot of warmth, and they were excited. They’ll remember this day for a long time.”
He added, “I’ve met Shirley Chisolm when she first started, I knew Geraldine Ferraro. I think some people change, and the mayor has made a remarkable change and he really is extremely sensitive. If he had a little bit more time, he’d be hanging out and walking through the crowd.”
With the 2009 mayoral race right around the corner, I asked Lopez if he’d support Bloomberg, who is not in any registered party, running in the Democratic primary. To do so, Bloomberg would need permission from three of the city’s five Democratic County leaders.
“It’s all relative to who runs,” he said. Then, as if obliged, he added, “But I’m the Democratic County leader. My obligation is to the Democratic Party. That’s a judgment I will make four or five months from now.”
AZI PAYBARAH can be reached via email at azi.paybarah@politickerny.com.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Judge’s Loss Looms Large for Party Chief
Vito J. Lopez, the Democratic Party leader in Brooklyn, faced a setback Tuesday when a candidate he backed lost her race.
JONATHAN P. HICKS, September 20, 2007,New York Times
Since he became the Brooklyn Democratic Party leader two years ago, Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez has sought to develop a sense of unity among its disparate and competitive political players.
Skip to next paragraph
City Room Blog
The latest news and reader discussions from around the five boroughs and the region.
Go to City Room » And while there have been some notable successes, there have been setbacks. The most high-profile stumble came on Tuesday, when the candidate Mr. Lopez supported for a Surrogate’s Court judgeship in Brooklyn was handily defeated by one endorsed by reform-oriented groups and a wide array of politicians.
Normally, a surrogate race in a sleepy September primary is seen as a sure thing for a Democratic county leader. But ShawnDya L. Simpson, a Civil Court judge whom Mr. Lopez supported for the surrogate seat, lost decisively with about 40 percent of the vote.
Diana A. Johnson, a State Supreme Court justice, won the nomination with 60 percent of the vote. And in doing so, she proved that the coalition behind her could be a more effective force than the party organization. Although both candidates are black, the race had strong racial overtones. Most black elected officials had urged Mr. Lopez to support Justice Johnson, who had their overwhelming support, and felt slighted when he did not.
The surrogate position is vacant because Judge Frank R. Seddio resigned in May.
In an interview yesterday, Mr. Lopez said the defeat should be seen in a larger context. The party organization’s record of successes in races for judgeships has been unmatched by his predecessors, he said.
“Since 2005, when I got this position, there have been 10 contested races for judges,” Mr. Lopez said. “And, altogether, we’ve won 9 of the 10. That’s unheard of prior to my being the county leader. And I’m proud of that record and of the work we’ve been doing.”
He also said that the Democratic Party in Brooklyn, the largest Democratic organization in the state, had been more inclusive in its endorsements than in the past — supporting an ethnically diverse field and an openly gay candidate — and that it was on far more solid financial footing than it used to be. Under his stewardship, he said, the party has gone from being in debt to having money to expand its staff.
Mr. Lopez said that the surrogate candidates were well qualified and that he would do everything he could to support Justice Johnson. She faces Theodore Alatsas, a lawyer running on the Republican and Conservative Party tickets, in November.
“It was a race, it’s over; I congratulate Diana Johnson and her campaign,” he said. “The important thing is now for us to move forward and to determine how we can become a solidly unified Democratic borough.”
Still, many politicians suggest that the loss of a surrogate race is a blemish that exposes weaknesses in the party’s leadership. Tuesday’s race was unlike other judicial races in the borough in the last two years. It was a high-profile contest that brought together a number of political clubs and labor unions — most notably the Transport Workers Union — and many politicians, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, to work against the organization.
“When I was growing up in Brooklyn, a surrogate race was considered a sure win for the organization,” Mr. Sharpton, the best-known supporter of Justice Johnson, said yesterday. “But clearly the election results show that the organization can be taken on and defeated. It showed that when the playing field is level, the organization can come up short.”
Gary Tilzer, Justice Johnson’s campaign manager, put it more bluntly, saying of Mr. Lopez: “He’s a county leader who can’t deliver votes. And if you can’t win a surrogate race in an off-year election, what muscle do you have with candidates running for mayor or other offices?”
Political analysts suggest that while Mr. Lopez’s candidate lost, some defeats are expected for a leader of a party as large as Brooklyn’s. Also, the party is still reeling from a scandal that culminated in February with the conviction of Clarence Norman Jr., the former Brooklyn Democratic leader, for extorting money from judicial candidates.
Mr. Lopez might well be encouraged because the forces opposing the party organization are not particularly unified. In fact, those coalitions tend to form on a contest-by-contest basis, with the characters changing from one race to the other.
“With everything that’s happened in the judiciary in Brooklyn, Vito’s loss shows that being the county leader in Brooklyn is a work in progress,” said Evan Stavisky, a political consultant who works primarily with Democratic candidates.
“Let’s face it,” Mr. Stavisky said. “The Brooklyn Democratic Party, though it’s the largest, hasn’t been a strong unified machine since the days of Meade Esposito,” who led the Brooklyn Democratic Party for a quarter century until he retired in 1983.
He added: “Being the county leader of any borough has headaches; being county leader of Brooklyn is an Excedrin headache.”
JONATHAN P. HICKS, September 20, 2007,New York Times
Since he became the Brooklyn Democratic Party leader two years ago, Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez has sought to develop a sense of unity among its disparate and competitive political players.
Skip to next paragraph
City Room Blog
The latest news and reader discussions from around the five boroughs and the region.
Go to City Room » And while there have been some notable successes, there have been setbacks. The most high-profile stumble came on Tuesday, when the candidate Mr. Lopez supported for a Surrogate’s Court judgeship in Brooklyn was handily defeated by one endorsed by reform-oriented groups and a wide array of politicians.
Normally, a surrogate race in a sleepy September primary is seen as a sure thing for a Democratic county leader. But ShawnDya L. Simpson, a Civil Court judge whom Mr. Lopez supported for the surrogate seat, lost decisively with about 40 percent of the vote.
Diana A. Johnson, a State Supreme Court justice, won the nomination with 60 percent of the vote. And in doing so, she proved that the coalition behind her could be a more effective force than the party organization. Although both candidates are black, the race had strong racial overtones. Most black elected officials had urged Mr. Lopez to support Justice Johnson, who had their overwhelming support, and felt slighted when he did not.
The surrogate position is vacant because Judge Frank R. Seddio resigned in May.
In an interview yesterday, Mr. Lopez said the defeat should be seen in a larger context. The party organization’s record of successes in races for judgeships has been unmatched by his predecessors, he said.
“Since 2005, when I got this position, there have been 10 contested races for judges,” Mr. Lopez said. “And, altogether, we’ve won 9 of the 10. That’s unheard of prior to my being the county leader. And I’m proud of that record and of the work we’ve been doing.”
He also said that the Democratic Party in Brooklyn, the largest Democratic organization in the state, had been more inclusive in its endorsements than in the past — supporting an ethnically diverse field and an openly gay candidate — and that it was on far more solid financial footing than it used to be. Under his stewardship, he said, the party has gone from being in debt to having money to expand its staff.
Mr. Lopez said that the surrogate candidates were well qualified and that he would do everything he could to support Justice Johnson. She faces Theodore Alatsas, a lawyer running on the Republican and Conservative Party tickets, in November.
“It was a race, it’s over; I congratulate Diana Johnson and her campaign,” he said. “The important thing is now for us to move forward and to determine how we can become a solidly unified Democratic borough.”
Still, many politicians suggest that the loss of a surrogate race is a blemish that exposes weaknesses in the party’s leadership. Tuesday’s race was unlike other judicial races in the borough in the last two years. It was a high-profile contest that brought together a number of political clubs and labor unions — most notably the Transport Workers Union — and many politicians, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, to work against the organization.
“When I was growing up in Brooklyn, a surrogate race was considered a sure win for the organization,” Mr. Sharpton, the best-known supporter of Justice Johnson, said yesterday. “But clearly the election results show that the organization can be taken on and defeated. It showed that when the playing field is level, the organization can come up short.”
Gary Tilzer, Justice Johnson’s campaign manager, put it more bluntly, saying of Mr. Lopez: “He’s a county leader who can’t deliver votes. And if you can’t win a surrogate race in an off-year election, what muscle do you have with candidates running for mayor or other offices?”
Political analysts suggest that while Mr. Lopez’s candidate lost, some defeats are expected for a leader of a party as large as Brooklyn’s. Also, the party is still reeling from a scandal that culminated in February with the conviction of Clarence Norman Jr., the former Brooklyn Democratic leader, for extorting money from judicial candidates.
Mr. Lopez might well be encouraged because the forces opposing the party organization are not particularly unified. In fact, those coalitions tend to form on a contest-by-contest basis, with the characters changing from one race to the other.
“With everything that’s happened in the judiciary in Brooklyn, Vito’s loss shows that being the county leader in Brooklyn is a work in progress,” said Evan Stavisky, a political consultant who works primarily with Democratic candidates.
“Let’s face it,” Mr. Stavisky said. “The Brooklyn Democratic Party, though it’s the largest, hasn’t been a strong unified machine since the days of Meade Esposito,” who led the Brooklyn Democratic Party for a quarter century until he retired in 1983.
He added: “Being the county leader of any borough has headaches; being county leader of Brooklyn is an Excedrin headache.”
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Brooklyn Dem's Judicial Convention is a Much More Serious Sham
Sunday, September 21, 2008
The Brooklyn Optimist
Last week, The Optimist went inside the Kings County Democratic County Committee meeting and exposed it as bad theater. Unfortunately, he didn't know in time about the one-night-only comedy extravaganza that County staged the following evening.
I'm talking, of course, about the Brooklyn Democratic Party's judicial convention, the backroom bonanza where Vito Lopez doles out seats on the bench to his kowtowing cronies. One Optimist reader with intimate knowledge of the event wrote us to say that if only they had had a video camera to record last Tuesday's spectacle then many a Brooklyn jurist would have had to forfeit their seats in shame the next morning when the tape surfaced to the public.
The Daily News wasn't there live, but they did write a damning editorial on Friday, denouncing the event as "a glimpse into the odious nature of how the political bosses make judges in New York". For even more on this sham, check out Oneshirt's post on Room Eight here.
Seriously, people, when is Brooklyn going to get its act together? We have far too many talented artists to keep churning out such drek. Long time Brooklyn reformers had hoped that the U.S. Supreme Court would finally bring an end to this fiasco, but unfortunately the Roberts Court (surprise, surprise) shamelessly sided with corruption as usual. Super scumbag Justice Scalia was brazen in his majority opinion: "Party conventions, with their attendant 'smoke-filled rooms' and domination by party leaders, have long been an accepted manner of selecting party candidates."
Justice Stevens, in a concurring opinion, stated his reasons for upholding Brooklyn's codified cronyism in a slightly less infuriating manner: "I recall my esteemed former colleague, Thurgood Marshall, remarking on numerous occasions: 'The Constitution does not prohibit legislatures from enacting stupid laws.'"
So, that's where we are. I can't fault Vito. The ball is in the court of our State's legislators. As long as they refuse to act on behalf of the people and change our "stupid laws", Brooklynites will continue to suffer injustice.
The Brooklyn Optimist
Last week, The Optimist went inside the Kings County Democratic County Committee meeting and exposed it as bad theater. Unfortunately, he didn't know in time about the one-night-only comedy extravaganza that County staged the following evening.
I'm talking, of course, about the Brooklyn Democratic Party's judicial convention, the backroom bonanza where Vito Lopez doles out seats on the bench to his kowtowing cronies. One Optimist reader with intimate knowledge of the event wrote us to say that if only they had had a video camera to record last Tuesday's spectacle then many a Brooklyn jurist would have had to forfeit their seats in shame the next morning when the tape surfaced to the public.
The Daily News wasn't there live, but they did write a damning editorial on Friday, denouncing the event as "a glimpse into the odious nature of how the political bosses make judges in New York". For even more on this sham, check out Oneshirt's post on Room Eight here.
Seriously, people, when is Brooklyn going to get its act together? We have far too many talented artists to keep churning out such drek. Long time Brooklyn reformers had hoped that the U.S. Supreme Court would finally bring an end to this fiasco, but unfortunately the Roberts Court (surprise, surprise) shamelessly sided with corruption as usual. Super scumbag Justice Scalia was brazen in his majority opinion: "Party conventions, with their attendant 'smoke-filled rooms' and domination by party leaders, have long been an accepted manner of selecting party candidates."
Justice Stevens, in a concurring opinion, stated his reasons for upholding Brooklyn's codified cronyism in a slightly less infuriating manner: "I recall my esteemed former colleague, Thurgood Marshall, remarking on numerous occasions: 'The Constitution does not prohibit legislatures from enacting stupid laws.'"
So, that's where we are. I can't fault Vito. The ball is in the court of our State's legislators. As long as they refuse to act on behalf of the people and change our "stupid laws", Brooklynites will continue to suffer injustice.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Judicial Sausage Factory Continues, Almost Nobody Noticed
Judicial Sausage Factory Continues, Almost Nobody Noticed
view edit
posted by Oneshirt
Fri, 09/19/2008 - 11:10am
After the former county leader goes to jail for corruption connected with judicial elections, a U.S. Federal Judge Gleeson calling them unconstitutional - fixed - and extensive condemnation by the city’s newspaper editorial pages, the charade called the Brooklyn Judicial Convention continued like nothing ever happened. In fact like a wounded animal or king the situation has grown grave and depraved.
Nothing has been learned by the experiences of the past 5 years a delegate whispered into my ear when boss Vito was not looking. Something very bad is happening to our way of life and culture. Our system of democracy, separation of powers, built in political party conflict has failed and nobody cares. The business as usually continuation of the convention is proof that our culture has changed so much that exposure and shame which used to be enough to cause reform has been replaced by a get over society, where morality or doing what is right does not matter. What is even more frightening, if it was up to the press there would be no record. Only the Manhattan gadfly a modern day Thomas Paine made sure there was a public record.
Today's Daily News Editorial
“For a glimpse into the odious nature of how the political bosses make judges in New York, we direct your attention to a letter in Friday's Voice of the People by veteran court watcher Alan Flacks. On Tuesday, Flacks dropped in on the Brooklyn Democratic Party's ceremony for elevating faithful lawyers to the bench. The party calls it a convention. It's not. It's a charade, currently directed by boss Vito Lopez.” – September 19, 2008.
U.S. Judge John Gleeson Rules Judicial Conventions Unconstitutional
"The highly unusual processes (judicial convention - the lone state in the nation to elect judges this way) by which that extremely important office (Supreme Court Judge) is filled perpetuate local political party leaders control and deprive the voters of any meaningful role," the judge wrote in the decision. "The result is an opaque, and undemocratic selection procedure that violates the rights of the voters and the rights of candidates who lack the backing of local party leaders."
The Flacks letter to the Daily News Which Resulted in Today’s Editorial:
Sausage Factory Floor
Manhattan: I attended the Kings County Democratic judicial nominating convention Tuesday. It was orchestrated "Soviet-style." Short, sweet, lady- and gentleman-like, the script called for the eight candidates to be designated or redesignated without opposition, even for supposed "open" seats. Before adjournment, each judge candidate got up and gave a short thank-you speech. Every one of them expressed gratitude to the party district leaders for their support, and they also expressed effusive thanks to and praise of County Leader Vito Lopez (photo). One "re-up," John Leventhal of the Appellate Division, Second Department (after inquiring if the press was present) thanked now-imprisoned county leader Clarence Norman as well, and another called Lopez "the greatest county leader ever." After adjournment, I spoke with a number of delegates who voted "automatically" and didn't seem to know for whom they were voting. They didn't know, and were just told for whom to vote.
Alan Flacks
Brooklyn District Attorney says the Supreme Court election system corrupts
Charles Hynes: Amicus Curiae Brief in Judge Lopez Torres vs. NYS Board of Elections:
“New York’s uniquely constructed and statutorily- mandated nominating process for the state Supreme Court, which in effect places ultimate control over who becomes a state Supreme Court justice in the hands of powerful county political party leaders, creates and sustains a breeding ground for corruption and malfeasance and undermines the public’s confidence in the judiciary."
Feldman and his Friends Play the System
“Similarly unseemly was the role played at the convention by Jeff Feldman, a one-time party honcho who was indicted with Norman but won dismissal of charges. No longer exiled from the convention, Feldman helped run Tuesday's show.” -– NY Daily News Editorial, September 19, 2008.
Judge Gleeson, U.S. District Court Cited Jeff Feldman’s action in the decision
“Beginning in March of 2003, then candidate for Supreme Court Lopez Torres wrote repeatedly to the Kings County Democratic Committee to learn three basic things; (1) the date, time and place of the convention; (2) the names of the delegates, so she could lobby them; and (3) whether she could address the delegates at the convention. She did not hear from its Executive Director, Jeffrey C. Feldman until September 4, 2003, after she once again requested the information. Feldman response is difficult to reconcile with the defendants' gauzy characterizations of a democratic process open to all party members who seek the office of Supreme Court Justice. He began by mocking the request for a list delegates to lobby: "AI erroneously believed that a learned jurist, such as yourself, would be well aware that Delegates and Alternate Delegates to the Democratic Judicial Convention stand for independent elections in the Primary Election, yet to be held. Thus no such list existed "anywhere in the world," Feldman helpfully added. As for Lopez Torres's inquiry about addressing the convention, Feldman wrote as follows: "I suffer from the innocent belief that the floor of the Convention is open, only, to elected Delegates and their successors.” - Judge Gleeson, U.S. District Court
Besides the press also missing, from this year Judicial Convention, were most of the reformers who in the past protested actions at the convention. Only Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats president Chris Owens and past president Josh Skaller stood alone in opposing this year’s convention, handing out a newspaper to every delegate outlining needed changes to the way New York “elects” Supreme Court Judges.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said Judicial Conventions are bad, declaring that :
“The Constitution Does Not Prohibit Legislatures From Enacting Stupid Laws.”
Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the courts did not have the constitutional right to change the way New York chooses it Supreme Court Judges not one elected official has spoken out about changing the STUPID LAW. In fact the good groups which conspired with the elected officials before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to allow Judicial Conventions to continue at the same time allowing candidates to petition there way onto the ballot are like the press missing action on this issue. In fact like the elected officials the good government groups have not commented on the STUPID LAWS.
For more information on the proposed changes proposed by Owens:
www.voteowens.com
For more information about the Judicial Convention, efforts to change it and a record of judicial corruption over the past 5 years:
http://jefffeldmanisback2008.blogspot.com/
view edit
posted by Oneshirt
Fri, 09/19/2008 - 11:10am
After the former county leader goes to jail for corruption connected with judicial elections, a U.S. Federal Judge Gleeson calling them unconstitutional - fixed - and extensive condemnation by the city’s newspaper editorial pages, the charade called the Brooklyn Judicial Convention continued like nothing ever happened. In fact like a wounded animal or king the situation has grown grave and depraved.
Nothing has been learned by the experiences of the past 5 years a delegate whispered into my ear when boss Vito was not looking. Something very bad is happening to our way of life and culture. Our system of democracy, separation of powers, built in political party conflict has failed and nobody cares. The business as usually continuation of the convention is proof that our culture has changed so much that exposure and shame which used to be enough to cause reform has been replaced by a get over society, where morality or doing what is right does not matter. What is even more frightening, if it was up to the press there would be no record. Only the Manhattan gadfly a modern day Thomas Paine made sure there was a public record.
Today's Daily News Editorial
“For a glimpse into the odious nature of how the political bosses make judges in New York, we direct your attention to a letter in Friday's Voice of the People by veteran court watcher Alan Flacks. On Tuesday, Flacks dropped in on the Brooklyn Democratic Party's ceremony for elevating faithful lawyers to the bench. The party calls it a convention. It's not. It's a charade, currently directed by boss Vito Lopez.” – September 19, 2008.
U.S. Judge John Gleeson Rules Judicial Conventions Unconstitutional
"The highly unusual processes (judicial convention - the lone state in the nation to elect judges this way) by which that extremely important office (Supreme Court Judge) is filled perpetuate local political party leaders control and deprive the voters of any meaningful role," the judge wrote in the decision. "The result is an opaque, and undemocratic selection procedure that violates the rights of the voters and the rights of candidates who lack the backing of local party leaders."
The Flacks letter to the Daily News Which Resulted in Today’s Editorial:
Sausage Factory Floor
Manhattan: I attended the Kings County Democratic judicial nominating convention Tuesday. It was orchestrated "Soviet-style." Short, sweet, lady- and gentleman-like, the script called for the eight candidates to be designated or redesignated without opposition, even for supposed "open" seats. Before adjournment, each judge candidate got up and gave a short thank-you speech. Every one of them expressed gratitude to the party district leaders for their support, and they also expressed effusive thanks to and praise of County Leader Vito Lopez (photo). One "re-up," John Leventhal of the Appellate Division, Second Department (after inquiring if the press was present) thanked now-imprisoned county leader Clarence Norman as well, and another called Lopez "the greatest county leader ever." After adjournment, I spoke with a number of delegates who voted "automatically" and didn't seem to know for whom they were voting. They didn't know, and were just told for whom to vote.
Alan Flacks
Brooklyn District Attorney says the Supreme Court election system corrupts
Charles Hynes: Amicus Curiae Brief in Judge Lopez Torres vs. NYS Board of Elections:
“New York’s uniquely constructed and statutorily- mandated nominating process for the state Supreme Court, which in effect places ultimate control over who becomes a state Supreme Court justice in the hands of powerful county political party leaders, creates and sustains a breeding ground for corruption and malfeasance and undermines the public’s confidence in the judiciary."
Feldman and his Friends Play the System
“Similarly unseemly was the role played at the convention by Jeff Feldman, a one-time party honcho who was indicted with Norman but won dismissal of charges. No longer exiled from the convention, Feldman helped run Tuesday's show.” -– NY Daily News Editorial, September 19, 2008.
Judge Gleeson, U.S. District Court Cited Jeff Feldman’s action in the decision
“Beginning in March of 2003, then candidate for Supreme Court Lopez Torres wrote repeatedly to the Kings County Democratic Committee to learn three basic things; (1) the date, time and place of the convention; (2) the names of the delegates, so she could lobby them; and (3) whether she could address the delegates at the convention. She did not hear from its Executive Director, Jeffrey C. Feldman until September 4, 2003, after she once again requested the information. Feldman response is difficult to reconcile with the defendants' gauzy characterizations of a democratic process open to all party members who seek the office of Supreme Court Justice. He began by mocking the request for a list delegates to lobby: "AI erroneously believed that a learned jurist, such as yourself, would be well aware that Delegates and Alternate Delegates to the Democratic Judicial Convention stand for independent elections in the Primary Election, yet to be held. Thus no such list existed "anywhere in the world," Feldman helpfully added. As for Lopez Torres's inquiry about addressing the convention, Feldman wrote as follows: "I suffer from the innocent belief that the floor of the Convention is open, only, to elected Delegates and their successors.” - Judge Gleeson, U.S. District Court
Besides the press also missing, from this year Judicial Convention, were most of the reformers who in the past protested actions at the convention. Only Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats president Chris Owens and past president Josh Skaller stood alone in opposing this year’s convention, handing out a newspaper to every delegate outlining needed changes to the way New York “elects” Supreme Court Judges.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said Judicial Conventions are bad, declaring that :
“The Constitution Does Not Prohibit Legislatures From Enacting Stupid Laws.”
Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the courts did not have the constitutional right to change the way New York chooses it Supreme Court Judges not one elected official has spoken out about changing the STUPID LAW. In fact the good groups which conspired with the elected officials before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to allow Judicial Conventions to continue at the same time allowing candidates to petition there way onto the ballot are like the press missing action on this issue. In fact like the elected officials the good government groups have not commented on the STUPID LAWS.
For more information on the proposed changes proposed by Owens:
www.voteowens.com
For more information about the Judicial Convention, efforts to change it and a record of judicial corruption over the past 5 years:
http://jefffeldmanisback2008.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
"Farce": A Review of Last Night's Brooklyn Democratic County Committee Meeting
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The Brooklyn Optimist
Last night, 181 Members of the Kings County Democratic County Committee huddled in an auditorium at St. Francis College in downtown Brooklyn to participate in the theatre of the absurd.
Move over Samuel Beckett, Vito Lopez in the hizzy.
Despite my unflappable optimism, I can't say I was surprised at how the night went. Though this was the first time I had attended the notorious affair, I had been warned in advance as to how these performances go. Basically, a bunch of elected officials and party loyalists take turns literally reading from a script to dutifully enact whatever agenda Vito Lopez has decided upon, and then call the meeting to a close as quickly as possible, so that its members don't get a headache from too much democracy all in one night.
Except for a few hiccups, that's precisely how last night played out. Taking every opportunity to eschew debate and neutralize dissent, the officials cast by Vito to read the script handed out to them earlier in the day did so as quickly as possible and then exited stage left.
The only people in the chorus who seemed to have missed the director's notes were Councilman Charles Barron, political blogger David Michaelson (a.k.a. mole333) and his wife Joy Romanski (corresponding secretary of the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats), and the 50+ newly elected members of the County Committee from the New Kings Democrats political club.
Charles Barron, who incidentally is a far better actor than any of the extras sent by Central Casting to play Vito's goons, began his sparkling performance by challenging the largely ceremonial adoption of the Committee's rules on the grounds that he had not been given a chance to review them in advance. The fact that someone dared to disrupt the show early on palpably unnerved the crowd, which suddenly had to confront the possibility that the airy musical they had come to see had been surreptitiously replaced by the complete works of Ibsen.
Councilman Lewis Fidler, playing a toned-down version of Councilman Lewis Fidler, took it upon himself to calm the crowd, arguing that were the County Committee not to adopt the rules that the meeting would not be officially convened (bad), the Kings County Democratic Party would not be a legally sanctioned body and thus incapable of appointing judges (very bad), and that the globe would go flying off its axis and plunge into the sun (maybe not so bad if McCain gets elected).
A few eventful scenes later, Charles Barron again took the stage and delivered the evening's only noteworthy monologue. Unfortunately, I couldn't scribble it down fast enough in my program, but it began: "This is ridiculous! I've never been to a more scripted meeting in my whole life! This is insulting!" His eloquent soliloquy was saluted with scattered enthusiastic applause and then promptly dismissed as a rant.
The rest of the evening's sound and fury was left to the members of the New Kings Democrats, who tried their best in the role of "Reformers", but were overshadowed by Vito Lopez and the 670 Proxies. Every time the night's Chairman State Senator Marty Connor would call a vote on any proposal not in the script, if the yeas and the nays sounded even (NKD's members made up a vocal third of the audience), Connor would dispense with the pageantry and remind the crowd that there was a superstar with 670 votes to his name waiting in the wings ready to make a surprise cameo at any time. Since this one man was worth over three times the value of those in attendance (despite all the electeds there), Connor's forthright observation always settled the issue conclusively.
Speaking of Connor, this reviewer would be remiss in not acknowledging that he was genuinely moved by the veteran's performance as "Broken Man in Twilight". Now I can't claim to have seen Connor in his heyday, but as last night's Richard III, he brought an unexpected candor to the proceedings. He appeared not as a grand Senator, but as a mere man in need of a horse, beset with the anguish that comes when the realization that he will never again be king.
As for the rest of the ensemble, Vito Lopez was captivating, but unbelievable, in the role of "The Gentle Giant" (seriously, that guy is towering).
Assemblywoman Annette Robinson and District Leader Olanike Alabi were disappointing as "The Early Adjourners". For those critics who will allege that the New Kings Democrats didn't accomplish anything last night, I would point to the bit parts read by this duo as the reason NKD didn't get more of a chance to shine. By ushering the show to a close before any new business could be proposed, Robinson and Alabi cheated a good portion of the audience out of the cost of admission. I was particularly dispirited by Alabi's role. Usually, one of the only truly progressive District Leaders, she could have made something of her part, but instead preferred to mail it in. I know she could have done better.
Equally disappointing were "The Electeds". And I mean all of them, except for Charles Barron. Not a single one of them in attendance last night (District Leaders included!), has any chance of being cast in 2009's much-anticipated blockbuster release "Brooklyn's Real Reformers". Of course, their agents and acting coaches will try to convince you otherwise next September, but don't believe the hype.
Last, but not least, The Optimist found himself unexpectedly the central figure in one of the night's only moments of true levity. I attended the meeting not yet knowing of the outcome of the primary race I ran last week to represent my tiny swath of Greenpoint as its Democratic County Committee Member. The good people at NKD took it upon themselves to nominate me for appointment to the committee on their slate of candidates for the 50th Assembly District. When Chairman Connor read the competing slate of candidates, it turned out that in the 93rd Election District Morgan Pehme's opponent on the competing slate was none other than "Morgan Pehme".
I stood up in the meeting, announced that I happened to be "Morgan Pehme", and said that the reason NKD had nominated me was because I did not yet know the outcome of the primary. Chairman Connor smiled and said, "Apparently, you won. Congratulations. Everyone seems to like you." My victory was greeted with perhaps the warmest and only non-controversial round of applause of the night.
I wonder if I'm still going to be as universally well-liked after you read my review of last night's show?
As always, I will remain optimistic.
The Brooklyn Optimist
Last night, 181 Members of the Kings County Democratic County Committee huddled in an auditorium at St. Francis College in downtown Brooklyn to participate in the theatre of the absurd.
Move over Samuel Beckett, Vito Lopez in the hizzy.
Despite my unflappable optimism, I can't say I was surprised at how the night went. Though this was the first time I had attended the notorious affair, I had been warned in advance as to how these performances go. Basically, a bunch of elected officials and party loyalists take turns literally reading from a script to dutifully enact whatever agenda Vito Lopez has decided upon, and then call the meeting to a close as quickly as possible, so that its members don't get a headache from too much democracy all in one night.
Except for a few hiccups, that's precisely how last night played out. Taking every opportunity to eschew debate and neutralize dissent, the officials cast by Vito to read the script handed out to them earlier in the day did so as quickly as possible and then exited stage left.
The only people in the chorus who seemed to have missed the director's notes were Councilman Charles Barron, political blogger David Michaelson (a.k.a. mole333) and his wife Joy Romanski (corresponding secretary of the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats), and the 50+ newly elected members of the County Committee from the New Kings Democrats political club.
Charles Barron, who incidentally is a far better actor than any of the extras sent by Central Casting to play Vito's goons, began his sparkling performance by challenging the largely ceremonial adoption of the Committee's rules on the grounds that he had not been given a chance to review them in advance. The fact that someone dared to disrupt the show early on palpably unnerved the crowd, which suddenly had to confront the possibility that the airy musical they had come to see had been surreptitiously replaced by the complete works of Ibsen.
Councilman Lewis Fidler, playing a toned-down version of Councilman Lewis Fidler, took it upon himself to calm the crowd, arguing that were the County Committee not to adopt the rules that the meeting would not be officially convened (bad), the Kings County Democratic Party would not be a legally sanctioned body and thus incapable of appointing judges (very bad), and that the globe would go flying off its axis and plunge into the sun (maybe not so bad if McCain gets elected).
A few eventful scenes later, Charles Barron again took the stage and delivered the evening's only noteworthy monologue. Unfortunately, I couldn't scribble it down fast enough in my program, but it began: "This is ridiculous! I've never been to a more scripted meeting in my whole life! This is insulting!" His eloquent soliloquy was saluted with scattered enthusiastic applause and then promptly dismissed as a rant.
The rest of the evening's sound and fury was left to the members of the New Kings Democrats, who tried their best in the role of "Reformers", but were overshadowed by Vito Lopez and the 670 Proxies. Every time the night's Chairman State Senator Marty Connor would call a vote on any proposal not in the script, if the yeas and the nays sounded even (NKD's members made up a vocal third of the audience), Connor would dispense with the pageantry and remind the crowd that there was a superstar with 670 votes to his name waiting in the wings ready to make a surprise cameo at any time. Since this one man was worth over three times the value of those in attendance (despite all the electeds there), Connor's forthright observation always settled the issue conclusively.
Speaking of Connor, this reviewer would be remiss in not acknowledging that he was genuinely moved by the veteran's performance as "Broken Man in Twilight". Now I can't claim to have seen Connor in his heyday, but as last night's Richard III, he brought an unexpected candor to the proceedings. He appeared not as a grand Senator, but as a mere man in need of a horse, beset with the anguish that comes when the realization that he will never again be king.
As for the rest of the ensemble, Vito Lopez was captivating, but unbelievable, in the role of "The Gentle Giant" (seriously, that guy is towering).
Assemblywoman Annette Robinson and District Leader Olanike Alabi were disappointing as "The Early Adjourners". For those critics who will allege that the New Kings Democrats didn't accomplish anything last night, I would point to the bit parts read by this duo as the reason NKD didn't get more of a chance to shine. By ushering the show to a close before any new business could be proposed, Robinson and Alabi cheated a good portion of the audience out of the cost of admission. I was particularly dispirited by Alabi's role. Usually, one of the only truly progressive District Leaders, she could have made something of her part, but instead preferred to mail it in. I know she could have done better.
Equally disappointing were "The Electeds". And I mean all of them, except for Charles Barron. Not a single one of them in attendance last night (District Leaders included!), has any chance of being cast in 2009's much-anticipated blockbuster release "Brooklyn's Real Reformers". Of course, their agents and acting coaches will try to convince you otherwise next September, but don't believe the hype.
Last, but not least, The Optimist found himself unexpectedly the central figure in one of the night's only moments of true levity. I attended the meeting not yet knowing of the outcome of the primary race I ran last week to represent my tiny swath of Greenpoint as its Democratic County Committee Member. The good people at NKD took it upon themselves to nominate me for appointment to the committee on their slate of candidates for the 50th Assembly District. When Chairman Connor read the competing slate of candidates, it turned out that in the 93rd Election District Morgan Pehme's opponent on the competing slate was none other than "Morgan Pehme".
I stood up in the meeting, announced that I happened to be "Morgan Pehme", and said that the reason NKD had nominated me was because I did not yet know the outcome of the primary. Chairman Connor smiled and said, "Apparently, you won. Congratulations. Everyone seems to like you." My victory was greeted with perhaps the warmest and only non-controversial round of applause of the night.
I wonder if I'm still going to be as universally well-liked after you read my review of last night's show?
As always, I will remain optimistic.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Vito’s Bad Days Go Unreported
Room 8 Mon, 09/15/2008
By reading the political blogs and newspapers you would never know that Brooklyn Democratic County Leader Vito Lopez lost most of the important contested contests over the past few years.
This year Lopez backed Senator Martin Connors and lost. More importantly his power block of voters in Williamsburg is clearly split, with the new Satmar faction headed by Rabbi Glanz/UJCARE, followers of Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum winning over a third of the vote for Squadron. Connor received 90.86 percent of the Chassidic vote when he ran against Diamondstone two years ago, but only 64.83 percent to Squadron's 35.17 percent on Tuesday. Vito and his Williamsburg faction of Rabbi Niederman/UJO, followers of Rabbi Zalman Teitelbaum, no longer have the field all to themselves. A bigger problem for Lopez with Connor’s defeat was that Squadron is a Schumer backed candidate. Our senator has a long memory; part of that remembrance is Lopez heading up Democrats for D'Amato. Will the emerging Schumer machine defeat Vito’s smoke and mirrors operation?
The county leader also lost the only contested judicial race in Brooklyn. Devin Cohen besides having a tax problem beat Vito’s candidate Roger Adler. Lopez also lost in the 40AD where Inez Barron beat his candidate Earl Williams easy.
In the boroughs other contested races, Lopez were busy playing all the candidates in their private discussions that- I am really with you game. Vito endorsed State Senator Parker the winner, but also was involved in both of his opponent’s campaigns. Councilman Stewart told election lawyer Mitch Alter that he would have problems with Vito if he hired him or consultant Gary Tilzer. If you look at the over half million dollars his other opponent Felder spent you would see that most of them consisted of a lot of Vito supporters and contributors. Since Vito supported Republicans in the past (D’Amato, Pataki and Giuliani) many in Brooklyn felt he was involved with the effort against Malcolm Smith to split the black vote in the 21st Senate District to elect Felder and to keep Republican control of the State Senate.
Even with the re-election of Parker and Silver there are signs in the few competitive judicial races that occurred, that voters are much more willing to vote against the machine. Despite the public growing signs of disgust with their dysfunctional government, the growing crime wave among their elected offices and most importantly the dismal won/loss record of county leaders, 2009 citywide candidates seem more and more willing to listen to the dictates of the county leaders in efforts to get their support. Perhaps that says more about their governing abilities and intelligence then they think.
The 2007 victory of now Surrogate Court Judge Johnson against Vito’s machine, he only beat her by less than 100 votes in his home district (53AD) is all but forgotten. So was Surrogate Court Judge Lopez Torres victory against the Brooklyn machine in 2005 in what can only be described as a collective mental block by the 2009 mayoral, controller, public advocate candidates and even the media. There has never been an analysis by any of the press of how independent coalitions were put together to block the machine for the first time in 100 years from the Brooklyn Surrogate’s Court. It is time for the media to understand that independent candidates and consultants give the voters a real voice against the thugs in this town who control campaigns, elective and party office.
And it does not help that the line between the reform clubs in Brooklyn and Vito judicial picks becomes increasingly more blearily, as the clubs endorsed more and more of his judicial candidates, ignoring the fact that while they might be good candidates it is the political system of control which causes the corruption and lack of reform.
Perhaps Lopez should learn a lesson in control from the Queens Democratic leaders, who buy off their endorsed candidates opponents before the voters have a chance to go to the polls. Both Senator Sabini and Assemblymen Lafayette got new jobs to make way for this year’s parties endorsed candidates. After petitioning and getting on the ballot, Baldeo who decided not to campaign in this year primaries for a Senate seat, for which he received 49% of the vote two years ago, had been in talks all summer with the leaders of the Queens machine.
Vito is not the only county leader who had a bad day on Tuesday. In the opening battle of the racial charged Bronx Civil War the Rainbow Revels defend the party organization and Chairman Jose Rivera attacked on Assemblymen Heastie, Ruben Diaz Jr. and Michael Benjamin by party-supported candidates. In addition, the Civil Court candidate the revels backed, Liz Taylor, had a big win (54 percent) against her challengers, Maria Matos (the party candidate) and Verena Powell. In Manhattan the county organization lost all three of their contested judicial races.
By reading the political blogs and newspapers you would never know that Brooklyn Democratic County Leader Vito Lopez lost most of the important contested contests over the past few years.
This year Lopez backed Senator Martin Connors and lost. More importantly his power block of voters in Williamsburg is clearly split, with the new Satmar faction headed by Rabbi Glanz/UJCARE, followers of Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum winning over a third of the vote for Squadron. Connor received 90.86 percent of the Chassidic vote when he ran against Diamondstone two years ago, but only 64.83 percent to Squadron's 35.17 percent on Tuesday. Vito and his Williamsburg faction of Rabbi Niederman/UJO, followers of Rabbi Zalman Teitelbaum, no longer have the field all to themselves. A bigger problem for Lopez with Connor’s defeat was that Squadron is a Schumer backed candidate. Our senator has a long memory; part of that remembrance is Lopez heading up Democrats for D'Amato. Will the emerging Schumer machine defeat Vito’s smoke and mirrors operation?
The county leader also lost the only contested judicial race in Brooklyn. Devin Cohen besides having a tax problem beat Vito’s candidate Roger Adler. Lopez also lost in the 40AD where Inez Barron beat his candidate Earl Williams easy.
In the boroughs other contested races, Lopez were busy playing all the candidates in their private discussions that- I am really with you game. Vito endorsed State Senator Parker the winner, but also was involved in both of his opponent’s campaigns. Councilman Stewart told election lawyer Mitch Alter that he would have problems with Vito if he hired him or consultant Gary Tilzer. If you look at the over half million dollars his other opponent Felder spent you would see that most of them consisted of a lot of Vito supporters and contributors. Since Vito supported Republicans in the past (D’Amato, Pataki and Giuliani) many in Brooklyn felt he was involved with the effort against Malcolm Smith to split the black vote in the 21st Senate District to elect Felder and to keep Republican control of the State Senate.
Even with the re-election of Parker and Silver there are signs in the few competitive judicial races that occurred, that voters are much more willing to vote against the machine. Despite the public growing signs of disgust with their dysfunctional government, the growing crime wave among their elected offices and most importantly the dismal won/loss record of county leaders, 2009 citywide candidates seem more and more willing to listen to the dictates of the county leaders in efforts to get their support. Perhaps that says more about their governing abilities and intelligence then they think.
The 2007 victory of now Surrogate Court Judge Johnson against Vito’s machine, he only beat her by less than 100 votes in his home district (53AD) is all but forgotten. So was Surrogate Court Judge Lopez Torres victory against the Brooklyn machine in 2005 in what can only be described as a collective mental block by the 2009 mayoral, controller, public advocate candidates and even the media. There has never been an analysis by any of the press of how independent coalitions were put together to block the machine for the first time in 100 years from the Brooklyn Surrogate’s Court. It is time for the media to understand that independent candidates and consultants give the voters a real voice against the thugs in this town who control campaigns, elective and party office.
And it does not help that the line between the reform clubs in Brooklyn and Vito judicial picks becomes increasingly more blearily, as the clubs endorsed more and more of his judicial candidates, ignoring the fact that while they might be good candidates it is the political system of control which causes the corruption and lack of reform.
Perhaps Lopez should learn a lesson in control from the Queens Democratic leaders, who buy off their endorsed candidates opponents before the voters have a chance to go to the polls. Both Senator Sabini and Assemblymen Lafayette got new jobs to make way for this year’s parties endorsed candidates. After petitioning and getting on the ballot, Baldeo who decided not to campaign in this year primaries for a Senate seat, for which he received 49% of the vote two years ago, had been in talks all summer with the leaders of the Queens machine.
Vito is not the only county leader who had a bad day on Tuesday. In the opening battle of the racial charged Bronx Civil War the Rainbow Revels defend the party organization and Chairman Jose Rivera attacked on Assemblymen Heastie, Ruben Diaz Jr. and Michael Benjamin by party-supported candidates. In addition, the Civil Court candidate the revels backed, Liz Taylor, had a big win (54 percent) against her challengers, Maria Matos (the party candidate) and Verena Powell. In Manhattan the county organization lost all three of their contested judicial races.
Vito’s Bad Days Go Unreported
By reading the political blogs and newspapers you would never know that Brooklyn Democratic County Leader Vito Lopez lost most of the important contested contests over the past few years.
This year Lopez backed Senator Martin Connors and lost. More importantly his power block of voters in Williamsburg is clearly split, with the new Satmar faction headed by Rabbi Glanz/UJCARE, followers of Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum winning over a third of the vote for Squadron. Connor received 90.86 percent of the Chassidic vote when he ran against Diamondstone two years ago, but only 64.83 percent to Squadron's 35.17 percent on Tuesday. Vito and his Williamsburg faction of Rabbi Niederman/UJO, followers of Rabbi Zalman Teitelbaum, no longer have the field all to themselves. A bigger problem for Lopez with Connor’s defeat was that Squadron is a Schumer backed candidate. Our senator has a long memory; part of that remembrance is Lopez heading up Democrats for D'Amato. Will the emerging Schumer machine defeat Vito’s smoke and mirrors operation?
The county leader also lost the only contested judicial race in Brooklyn. Devin Cohen besides having a tax problem beat Vito’s candidate Roger Adler. Lopez also lost in the 40AD where Inez Barron beat his candidate Earl Williams easy.
In the boroughs other contested races, Lopez were busy playing all the candidates in their private discussions that- I am really with you game. Vito endorsed State Senator Parker the winner, but also was involved in both of his opponent’s campaigns. Councilman Stewart told election lawyer Mitch Alter that he would have problems with Vito if he hired him or consultant Gary Tilzer. If you look at the over half million dollars his other opponent Felder spent you would see that most of them consisted of a lot of Vito supporters and contributors. Since Vito supported Republicans in the past (D’Amato, Pataki and Giuliani) many in Brooklyn felt he was involved with the effort against Malcolm Smith to split the black vote in the 21st Senate District to elect Felder and to keep Republican control of the State Senate.
Even with the re-election of Parker and Silver there are signs in the few competitive judicial races that occurred, that voters are much more willing to vote against the machine. Despite the public growing signs of disgust with their dysfunctional government, the growing crime wave among their elected offices and most importantly the dismal won/loss record of county leaders, 2009 citywide candidates seem more and more willing to listen to the dictates of the county leaders in efforts to get their support. Perhaps that says more about their governing abilities and intelligence then they think.
The 2007 victory of now Surrogate Court Judge Johnson against Vito’s machine, he only beat her by less than 100 votes in his home district (53AD) is all but forgotten. So was Surrogate Court Judge Lopez Torres victory against the Brooklyn machine in 2005 in what can only be described as a collective mental block by the 2009 mayoral, controller, public advocate candidates and even the media. There has never been an analysis by any of the press of how independent coalitions were put together to block the machine for the first time in 100 years from the Brooklyn Surrogate’s Court. It is time for the media to understand that independent candidates and consultants give the voters a real voice against the thugs in this town who control campaigns, elective and party office.
And it does not help that the line between the reform clubs in Brooklyn and Vito judicial picks becomes increasingly more blearily, as the clubs endorsed more and more of his judicial candidates, ignoring the fact that while they might be good candidates it is the political system of control which causes the corruption and lack of reform.
Perhaps Lopez should learn a lesson in control from the Queens Democratic leaders, who buy off their endorsed candidates opponents before the voters have a chance to go to the polls. Both Senator Sabini and Assemblymen Lafayette got new jobs to make way for this year’s parties endorsed candidates. After petitioning and getting on the ballot, Baldeo who decided not to campaign in this year primaries for a Senate seat, for which he received 49% of the vote two years ago, had been in talks all summer with the leaders of the Queens machine.
Vito is not the only county leader who had a bad day on Tuesday. In the opening battle of the racial charged Bronx Civil War the Rainbow Revels defend the party organization and Chairman Jose Rivera attacked on Assemblymen Heastie, Ruben Diaz Jr. and Michael Benjamin by party-supported candidates. In addition, the Civil Court candidate the revels backed, Liz Taylor, had a big win (54 percent) against her challengers, Maria Matos (the party candidate) and Verena Powell. In Manhattan the county organization lost all three of their contested judicial races.
This year Lopez backed Senator Martin Connors and lost. More importantly his power block of voters in Williamsburg is clearly split, with the new Satmar faction headed by Rabbi Glanz/UJCARE, followers of Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum winning over a third of the vote for Squadron. Connor received 90.86 percent of the Chassidic vote when he ran against Diamondstone two years ago, but only 64.83 percent to Squadron's 35.17 percent on Tuesday. Vito and his Williamsburg faction of Rabbi Niederman/UJO, followers of Rabbi Zalman Teitelbaum, no longer have the field all to themselves. A bigger problem for Lopez with Connor’s defeat was that Squadron is a Schumer backed candidate. Our senator has a long memory; part of that remembrance is Lopez heading up Democrats for D'Amato. Will the emerging Schumer machine defeat Vito’s smoke and mirrors operation?
The county leader also lost the only contested judicial race in Brooklyn. Devin Cohen besides having a tax problem beat Vito’s candidate Roger Adler. Lopez also lost in the 40AD where Inez Barron beat his candidate Earl Williams easy.
In the boroughs other contested races, Lopez were busy playing all the candidates in their private discussions that- I am really with you game. Vito endorsed State Senator Parker the winner, but also was involved in both of his opponent’s campaigns. Councilman Stewart told election lawyer Mitch Alter that he would have problems with Vito if he hired him or consultant Gary Tilzer. If you look at the over half million dollars his other opponent Felder spent you would see that most of them consisted of a lot of Vito supporters and contributors. Since Vito supported Republicans in the past (D’Amato, Pataki and Giuliani) many in Brooklyn felt he was involved with the effort against Malcolm Smith to split the black vote in the 21st Senate District to elect Felder and to keep Republican control of the State Senate.
Even with the re-election of Parker and Silver there are signs in the few competitive judicial races that occurred, that voters are much more willing to vote against the machine. Despite the public growing signs of disgust with their dysfunctional government, the growing crime wave among their elected offices and most importantly the dismal won/loss record of county leaders, 2009 citywide candidates seem more and more willing to listen to the dictates of the county leaders in efforts to get their support. Perhaps that says more about their governing abilities and intelligence then they think.
The 2007 victory of now Surrogate Court Judge Johnson against Vito’s machine, he only beat her by less than 100 votes in his home district (53AD) is all but forgotten. So was Surrogate Court Judge Lopez Torres victory against the Brooklyn machine in 2005 in what can only be described as a collective mental block by the 2009 mayoral, controller, public advocate candidates and even the media. There has never been an analysis by any of the press of how independent coalitions were put together to block the machine for the first time in 100 years from the Brooklyn Surrogate’s Court. It is time for the media to understand that independent candidates and consultants give the voters a real voice against the thugs in this town who control campaigns, elective and party office.
And it does not help that the line between the reform clubs in Brooklyn and Vito judicial picks becomes increasingly more blearily, as the clubs endorsed more and more of his judicial candidates, ignoring the fact that while they might be good candidates it is the political system of control which causes the corruption and lack of reform.
Perhaps Lopez should learn a lesson in control from the Queens Democratic leaders, who buy off their endorsed candidates opponents before the voters have a chance to go to the polls. Both Senator Sabini and Assemblymen Lafayette got new jobs to make way for this year’s parties endorsed candidates. After petitioning and getting on the ballot, Baldeo who decided not to campaign in this year primaries for a Senate seat, for which he received 49% of the vote two years ago, had been in talks all summer with the leaders of the Queens machine.
Vito is not the only county leader who had a bad day on Tuesday. In the opening battle of the racial charged Bronx Civil War the Rainbow Revels defend the party organization and Chairman Jose Rivera attacked on Assemblymen Heastie, Ruben Diaz Jr. and Michael Benjamin by party-supported candidates. In addition, the Civil Court candidate the revels backed, Liz Taylor, had a big win (54 percent) against her challengers, Maria Matos (the party candidate) and Verena Powell. In Manhattan the county organization lost all three of their contested judicial races.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Voting Lopez social programs ensure political victory
Voting
Lopez’s social programs ensure political victory
By Julie Cirelli
At 9:21 pm Tuesday evening, the first of what would be more than a dozen phone calls – early counts from the 53rd Assembly district’s polling sites – pierced the nervous clamor of Democratic candidates at their clubhouse in Bushwick, Brooklyn.
As other candidates scoured the Internet for early forecasts of wins and losses, Assemblyman Vito Lopez sat quietly, the very picture of calm and composure, as he watched the local television stations broadcast early results of the national elections.
For Lopez, it was not a matter of whether he would win. Of course he would win. The only question would be, by how much?
Angela Battaglia, a city planning commissioner and longtime companion of Lopez, intercepted the call from the first poll.
“Vito!” she shouted, cupping the phone receiver with her hand.
“You got 212. It was 212 to 2.”
She winced at the “2,” as though conceding two votes to Lopez’s Republican competitor, Ameriar Feliciano, was an insult.
Lopez heads one of Brooklyn’s strongest political operations in the recent history. In Bushwick, the ubiquity of his community programs inspires deep feelings from his constituents. Many are fiercely devoted. Others are deeply frustrated.
Over the din of ringing telephones, someone shouted jokingly, “Hey Vito, do you know who those two people are?”
“Sure,” he nodded, flashing his signature grave, grandfatherly smile. “Of course.”
In a community like Bushwick, which is largely composed of poor and immigrant families, affordable housing is a constant issue.
Under the blanket organization of his Ridgewood-Bushwick Senior Citizens Council (RBSCC), Lopez opened at least 50 organizations to serve the young, the old, and practically everyone in between. These are senior housing facilities and community centers, tenant advocacy and educational programs for teens and young adults.
“He has a lot of senior citizen support because of all of the services he provides to them, especially housing,” Mercedes Viera Serrano, a city health worker and volunteer poll monitor, said election afternoon at the RBSCC senior housing facility Hope Gardens.
“I voted for him,” said Julia Fernandez, a 62-year-old resident there.
“And I’m going to vote for him,” 82-year-old Hope Gardens resident Antonia Fernandez chimed in. “I’ve known him for a lot of years.”
At Hope Gardens, Lopez garnered all 141 votes. His opponent did not receive even one.
Lopez takes seniors from his centers on regular picnics, and mans the barbecue with a smock with his name on it in big letters, according to Msgr. John J. Powis, pastor of St. Barbara’s Roman Catholic Church in Bushwick.
In the entrances to many poling sites in Bushwick, large florescent yellow and orange posters remind seniors in English and Spanish that they are invited to Thanksgiving dinner with Vito Lopez later this month.
“Even if he’s not running, people will come in and look for his name,” said poll worker Mary Ann Lebron. “We’ll explain that he’s not running, but that he supports a couple of parties.”
Lebron added that Lopez recently fought for an after-school program at her son’s school.
“From the time they can vote – from all ages – as soon as they turn 18, they come out to support him, because his programs touch all ages.” Lebron said.
Nicole Marwell wrote, “He has the political clout to deliver significant financial resources to the community…In return, he demands full support from those who benefit,” in her study “Social Networks and Social Capital as Resources for Community Revitalization” for the non-profit watchdog and research group Nonprofit Sector Research Fund.
During the first election of former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani – whom Lopez crossed party lines to endorse – Marwell followed the actions of the Ridgewood-Bushwick Housing Coalition’s employees on Election Day for her research.
“All the RBSCC offices were closed, and employees were ‘strongly encouraged’ – or, depending who you asked, ‘expected’ – to come out to the Assemblyman’s political club, and participate in the effort to blanket the district with Giuliani literature,” she wrote.
The RBSCC office was also closed this Tuesday.
Some of the RBSCC’s employees did volunteer their time to work on election activities, said poll worker Louise Cunningham.
“If you need help, he’ll be there. When he needs help, well, they say, ‘One hand washes the other,’” she said.
Lopez’s popular support in the community, particularly by those touched by his programs, has translated into political clout.
“Who does Vito support?” asked Powis. “Whoever it is, will win. There’s no way anybody could win without Vito’s support.”
Of the polling sites in 53rd Assembly District that are not located inside public schools, more than half were located within the RBSCC centers themselves.
“It doesn’t mean he’s controlling the vote, but he’s certainly influencing it,” said the Rev. James Kelley, pastor at St. Brigid’s Roman Catholic Church in Bushwick.
When Vito Lopez came on the political scene in Bushwick in the 1970s, weeks of continuous arson fires and looting had ravaged the community. Politicians known as “poverty pimps” exploited anti-poverty programs for use as their personal piggy banks.
A left-wing social worker, Lopez formed progressive clubs and organizations, and was funded extensively as a result. His programs were successful, and as they grew, so did his political power.
“Vito Lopez has helped build one of the most impressive and substantial social and legal services operations in the city," said Andrew White, director of the Center for New York City Affairs at the New School University in Manhattan. "It's a model a lot of politicians use to build their base."
“This is standard New York City politics,” White said. “Vito Lopez is just very, very good at it.”
Others feel that Lopez has gone overboard. Despite devoting his life’s work to providing affordable housing to the poor, elderly and disabled in Brooklyn, Lopez is loathe to allow others to do the same, Powis said.
Community leaders who do not align themselves politically with Lopez say that they are more likely to hit walls, particularly when it comes to funding for public housing initiatives.
“If you play the game, you’ll be taken care of,” Powis said. “If you don’t play the game, you have to be very careful, or you’ll lose your funding.”
But Lopez supporters shrug off such criticisms.
“Where do you think all the houses going up come from?” asked Eileen O’Brien, a member of the Thomas Jefferson Democratic Club and Lopez supporter who was at Lopez’ club election night. “He’s raised money for them. That’s what you hope your assemblyman does.”
Julie Cirelli can be contacted at jbc2002@columbia.edu
Lopez’s social programs ensure political victory
By Julie Cirelli
At 9:21 pm Tuesday evening, the first of what would be more than a dozen phone calls – early counts from the 53rd Assembly district’s polling sites – pierced the nervous clamor of Democratic candidates at their clubhouse in Bushwick, Brooklyn.
As other candidates scoured the Internet for early forecasts of wins and losses, Assemblyman Vito Lopez sat quietly, the very picture of calm and composure, as he watched the local television stations broadcast early results of the national elections.
For Lopez, it was not a matter of whether he would win. Of course he would win. The only question would be, by how much?
Angela Battaglia, a city planning commissioner and longtime companion of Lopez, intercepted the call from the first poll.
“Vito!” she shouted, cupping the phone receiver with her hand.
“You got 212. It was 212 to 2.”
She winced at the “2,” as though conceding two votes to Lopez’s Republican competitor, Ameriar Feliciano, was an insult.
Lopez heads one of Brooklyn’s strongest political operations in the recent history. In Bushwick, the ubiquity of his community programs inspires deep feelings from his constituents. Many are fiercely devoted. Others are deeply frustrated.
Over the din of ringing telephones, someone shouted jokingly, “Hey Vito, do you know who those two people are?”
“Sure,” he nodded, flashing his signature grave, grandfatherly smile. “Of course.”
In a community like Bushwick, which is largely composed of poor and immigrant families, affordable housing is a constant issue.
Under the blanket organization of his Ridgewood-Bushwick Senior Citizens Council (RBSCC), Lopez opened at least 50 organizations to serve the young, the old, and practically everyone in between. These are senior housing facilities and community centers, tenant advocacy and educational programs for teens and young adults.
“He has a lot of senior citizen support because of all of the services he provides to them, especially housing,” Mercedes Viera Serrano, a city health worker and volunteer poll monitor, said election afternoon at the RBSCC senior housing facility Hope Gardens.
“I voted for him,” said Julia Fernandez, a 62-year-old resident there.
“And I’m going to vote for him,” 82-year-old Hope Gardens resident Antonia Fernandez chimed in. “I’ve known him for a lot of years.”
At Hope Gardens, Lopez garnered all 141 votes. His opponent did not receive even one.
Lopez takes seniors from his centers on regular picnics, and mans the barbecue with a smock with his name on it in big letters, according to Msgr. John J. Powis, pastor of St. Barbara’s Roman Catholic Church in Bushwick.
In the entrances to many poling sites in Bushwick, large florescent yellow and orange posters remind seniors in English and Spanish that they are invited to Thanksgiving dinner with Vito Lopez later this month.
“Even if he’s not running, people will come in and look for his name,” said poll worker Mary Ann Lebron. “We’ll explain that he’s not running, but that he supports a couple of parties.”
Lebron added that Lopez recently fought for an after-school program at her son’s school.
“From the time they can vote – from all ages – as soon as they turn 18, they come out to support him, because his programs touch all ages.” Lebron said.
Nicole Marwell wrote, “He has the political clout to deliver significant financial resources to the community…In return, he demands full support from those who benefit,” in her study “Social Networks and Social Capital as Resources for Community Revitalization” for the non-profit watchdog and research group Nonprofit Sector Research Fund.
During the first election of former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani – whom Lopez crossed party lines to endorse – Marwell followed the actions of the Ridgewood-Bushwick Housing Coalition’s employees on Election Day for her research.
“All the RBSCC offices were closed, and employees were ‘strongly encouraged’ – or, depending who you asked, ‘expected’ – to come out to the Assemblyman’s political club, and participate in the effort to blanket the district with Giuliani literature,” she wrote.
The RBSCC office was also closed this Tuesday.
Some of the RBSCC’s employees did volunteer their time to work on election activities, said poll worker Louise Cunningham.
“If you need help, he’ll be there. When he needs help, well, they say, ‘One hand washes the other,’” she said.
Lopez’s popular support in the community, particularly by those touched by his programs, has translated into political clout.
“Who does Vito support?” asked Powis. “Whoever it is, will win. There’s no way anybody could win without Vito’s support.”
Of the polling sites in 53rd Assembly District that are not located inside public schools, more than half were located within the RBSCC centers themselves.
“It doesn’t mean he’s controlling the vote, but he’s certainly influencing it,” said the Rev. James Kelley, pastor at St. Brigid’s Roman Catholic Church in Bushwick.
When Vito Lopez came on the political scene in Bushwick in the 1970s, weeks of continuous arson fires and looting had ravaged the community. Politicians known as “poverty pimps” exploited anti-poverty programs for use as their personal piggy banks.
A left-wing social worker, Lopez formed progressive clubs and organizations, and was funded extensively as a result. His programs were successful, and as they grew, so did his political power.
“Vito Lopez has helped build one of the most impressive and substantial social and legal services operations in the city," said Andrew White, director of the Center for New York City Affairs at the New School University in Manhattan. "It's a model a lot of politicians use to build their base."
“This is standard New York City politics,” White said. “Vito Lopez is just very, very good at it.”
Others feel that Lopez has gone overboard. Despite devoting his life’s work to providing affordable housing to the poor, elderly and disabled in Brooklyn, Lopez is loathe to allow others to do the same, Powis said.
Community leaders who do not align themselves politically with Lopez say that they are more likely to hit walls, particularly when it comes to funding for public housing initiatives.
“If you play the game, you’ll be taken care of,” Powis said. “If you don’t play the game, you have to be very careful, or you’ll lose your funding.”
But Lopez supporters shrug off such criticisms.
“Where do you think all the houses going up come from?” asked Eileen O’Brien, a member of the Thomas Jefferson Democratic Club and Lopez supporter who was at Lopez’ club election night. “He’s raised money for them. That’s what you hope your assemblyman does.”
Julie Cirelli can be contacted at jbc2002@columbia.edu
City Council's glazed ham is still porky
When City Council members give money to nonprofit groups run by their relatives, we call it pork.
So what do we call it when a city agency gives away $2 million to help vulnerable people, and $700,000 of it goes to groups heavy with political clout?
How about glazed ham? It's better than pork - it's a prime slab of cash from a respected agency, untainted with the odor of Council member items. And it has a sweet, shiny coating to shield it from any hint of favoritism.
This glazed ham was served up in Williamsburg and Greenpoint, two Brooklyn neighborhoods where a big rezoning led to fears that greedy landlords would push out poor tenants. The Department of Housing Preservation and Development put aside $2 million to counsel and protect tenants, and said it would hire local groups to do the work.
A coalition of seven nonprofits from the neighborhood applied as one in a bid to handle the whole project. The city liked them well enough to give them $1.3 million and more than half of the area as their territory.
Who got the rest? Some went to United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg, an Orthodox group that politicians like to court. It asked to serve the Orthodox parts of Williamsburg that it knows better than any other group, and got $216,570 to do it.
But how to explain the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council?
That group - synonymous with its founder, Assemblyman Vito Lopez, the powerful head of the Assembly Housing Committee - applied for areas it wanted. The city agreed and gave it $475,265.
"They said it was done through a blind process," said Paul Cogley of Churches United, one of the seven groups. "It seems like a very political decision."
Some wonder why a group based in Ridgewood and Bushwick is serving Greenpoint and Williamsburg. And some have noted that Lopez helped broker the rezoning deal that included the $2 million in the first place.
"Whether or not the group has clout, they put in a good proposal," said Bill Carbine, HPD's assistant commissioner for neighborhood preservation.
HPD said Ridgewood Bushwick's application got the highest score of the three, but didn't reveal the criteria or the results.
"They're looking for someone who has the capacity," added Lopez, noting that Ridgewood Bushwick already handles legal assistance work in Williamsburg. "I'm open to having a reasonable dialogue with anyone who wants to work on this."
Ridgewood Bushwick has a long history and a solid track record in its neighborhoods. It is also no stranger to pork, glazed ham and other choice cuts of your tax dollars: Ridgewood Bushwick has received almost $21.5 million in other city funds over the last three years.
There's much more at stake. The city is working on rezoning 19 acres of old factories for up to 1,000 new homes on a triangle of land where Williamsburg meets Bushwick meets Bedford-Stuyvesant.
When nonprofits get picked to develop those homes, they'll get money, staff and influence. And when HPD held a seminar last fall to figure out the future of the area, the invited groups included UJO and Ridgewood Bushwick.
It's not pork. It's glazed ham.
alisberg@nydailynews.com
City Council's glazed ham is still porkySaturday, June 14th 2008, 7:00 PM NY Daily News
A powerful Brooklyn lawmaker who has delivered millions of dollars in state aid to his district is also on the payroll of one of the community groups he has funded - but won't say what he's paid to do.
Assemblyman Vito Lopez (D-Bushwick) has been a consultant to a not-for-profit housing group since 1998, earning as much as $57,600 a year, according to tax records and check stubs obtained by The Post.
Lopez's consulting fees come on top of the $92,000 annual salary he earns as a state lawmaker and committee chairman.
When asked about his role as a consultant and any possible conflict with his position as chairman of the Assembly's Housing Committee, Lopez erupted in a bizarre tirade.
"On Tuesday we're feeding 2,000 senior citizens, what are you doing?" he snapped.
"How much do you get paid?" Lopez continued. "Unless you tell me how much you get paid and what you're doing on Christmas, I won't answer your questions."
Yet even when that information was provided, Lopez still refused to discuss his consulting work or explain what the housing-management group does in his district.
Lopez even suggested The Post's questions be posed to one of his daughters. He later tried to say he was joking with that suggestion.
Lopez is among Gov. Pataki's strongest supporters in the city. He has boasted of the tens of millions of dollars that he has brought to his district annually for housing and other programs.
Groups he has founded depend heavily on state largess. His Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center, an umbrella group for many of the district's not-for-profits, receives $7 million a year in public funds.
Community Property Management Inc. operates housing built or rehabilitated by groups affiliated with the Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center. Officials at the management group did not return calls for comment.
In filings with the state's Legislative Ethics Committee, Lopez, as required by law, declared his consulting work for Community Property Management during 1998, 1999 and 2000.
In those filings, Lopez described the work as providing technical assistance for program development, but was not required to state his income.
Source Citation: "POL BENEFIT$ FROM STATE-AIDED GROUP.(News)." New York Post (New York, NY) (Dec 23, 2001):
So what do we call it when a city agency gives away $2 million to help vulnerable people, and $700,000 of it goes to groups heavy with political clout?
How about glazed ham? It's better than pork - it's a prime slab of cash from a respected agency, untainted with the odor of Council member items. And it has a sweet, shiny coating to shield it from any hint of favoritism.
This glazed ham was served up in Williamsburg and Greenpoint, two Brooklyn neighborhoods where a big rezoning led to fears that greedy landlords would push out poor tenants. The Department of Housing Preservation and Development put aside $2 million to counsel and protect tenants, and said it would hire local groups to do the work.
A coalition of seven nonprofits from the neighborhood applied as one in a bid to handle the whole project. The city liked them well enough to give them $1.3 million and more than half of the area as their territory.
Who got the rest? Some went to United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg, an Orthodox group that politicians like to court. It asked to serve the Orthodox parts of Williamsburg that it knows better than any other group, and got $216,570 to do it.
But how to explain the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council?
That group - synonymous with its founder, Assemblyman Vito Lopez, the powerful head of the Assembly Housing Committee - applied for areas it wanted. The city agreed and gave it $475,265.
"They said it was done through a blind process," said Paul Cogley of Churches United, one of the seven groups. "It seems like a very political decision."
Some wonder why a group based in Ridgewood and Bushwick is serving Greenpoint and Williamsburg. And some have noted that Lopez helped broker the rezoning deal that included the $2 million in the first place.
"Whether or not the group has clout, they put in a good proposal," said Bill Carbine, HPD's assistant commissioner for neighborhood preservation.
HPD said Ridgewood Bushwick's application got the highest score of the three, but didn't reveal the criteria or the results.
"They're looking for someone who has the capacity," added Lopez, noting that Ridgewood Bushwick already handles legal assistance work in Williamsburg. "I'm open to having a reasonable dialogue with anyone who wants to work on this."
Ridgewood Bushwick has a long history and a solid track record in its neighborhoods. It is also no stranger to pork, glazed ham and other choice cuts of your tax dollars: Ridgewood Bushwick has received almost $21.5 million in other city funds over the last three years.
There's much more at stake. The city is working on rezoning 19 acres of old factories for up to 1,000 new homes on a triangle of land where Williamsburg meets Bushwick meets Bedford-Stuyvesant.
When nonprofits get picked to develop those homes, they'll get money, staff and influence. And when HPD held a seminar last fall to figure out the future of the area, the invited groups included UJO and Ridgewood Bushwick.
It's not pork. It's glazed ham.
alisberg@nydailynews.com
City Council's glazed ham is still porkySaturday, June 14th 2008, 7:00 PM NY Daily News
A powerful Brooklyn lawmaker who has delivered millions of dollars in state aid to his district is also on the payroll of one of the community groups he has funded - but won't say what he's paid to do.
Assemblyman Vito Lopez (D-Bushwick) has been a consultant to a not-for-profit housing group since 1998, earning as much as $57,600 a year, according to tax records and check stubs obtained by The Post.
Lopez's consulting fees come on top of the $92,000 annual salary he earns as a state lawmaker and committee chairman.
When asked about his role as a consultant and any possible conflict with his position as chairman of the Assembly's Housing Committee, Lopez erupted in a bizarre tirade.
"On Tuesday we're feeding 2,000 senior citizens, what are you doing?" he snapped.
"How much do you get paid?" Lopez continued. "Unless you tell me how much you get paid and what you're doing on Christmas, I won't answer your questions."
Yet even when that information was provided, Lopez still refused to discuss his consulting work or explain what the housing-management group does in his district.
Lopez even suggested The Post's questions be posed to one of his daughters. He later tried to say he was joking with that suggestion.
Lopez is among Gov. Pataki's strongest supporters in the city. He has boasted of the tens of millions of dollars that he has brought to his district annually for housing and other programs.
Groups he has founded depend heavily on state largess. His Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center, an umbrella group for many of the district's not-for-profits, receives $7 million a year in public funds.
Community Property Management Inc. operates housing built or rehabilitated by groups affiliated with the Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center. Officials at the management group did not return calls for comment.
In filings with the state's Legislative Ethics Committee, Lopez, as required by law, declared his consulting work for Community Property Management during 1998, 1999 and 2000.
In those filings, Lopez described the work as providing technical assistance for program development, but was not required to state his income.
Source Citation: "POL BENEFIT$ FROM STATE-AIDED GROUP.(News)." New York Post (New York, NY) (Dec 23, 2001):
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Vito Lopez Moves To Take Pfizer's Brooklyn Site By Eminent Domain
by Eliot Brown | March 26, 2008 | New York Obsever
Vito Lopez.Earlier this month, in the brief few-day period when only one governor was embroiled in a sex scandal, Brooklyn Assemblyman Vito Lopez introduced a bill to use eminent domain to take pharmaceutical giant Pfizer’s approximately 15-acre manufacturing plant site in East Williamsburg and turn it into affordable housing (he's talked about this previously).
With the plant slated to close later this year, Pfizer had put out a search in January for developers to buy the land and build a mixed-use, mixed-income development out of the site.
Though the company has yet to report any progress along that front, and even that concept—of a mixed-income complex—angered Mr. Lopez, the Assembly housing committee chairman, who previously has expressed revulsion at the notion that the company would proceed down a path that would bring it any significant financial gain.
The bill, introduced March 13 with 20 other legislators signing on, instructs the Division of Housing and Community Renewal to take the property with eminent domain. In the bill’s justification listed on the Assembly’s Web site, Mr. Lopez said he was taking action on Pfizer because it failed to donate its land, as it has done in other instances. "Though Pfizer has shown concern for other communities coping with job loss and housing needs, it appears the global company has little interest in returning the land in question to the State of New York," the justification reads.
Assuming Mr. Lopez can read the tea leaves as well as any other veteran Albany legislator—one would imagine the bill has little chance of going anywhere—perhaps he is using it to push Pfizer to include more affordable housing in whatever becomes of the site.
Pfizer opposes the measure (who would have thought), and emailed this response:
Pfizer Inc strongly opposes A10272 (V. Lopez), a bill to allow the seizure of Pfizer-owned property in Brooklyn by eminent domain for the development of affordable housing by New York State. Not only is the concept of state-sponsored eminent domain extremely premature at this point and potentially chilling for development statewide, but the legislation’s justification fails to mention that affordable housing is one of the key uses currently being considered as part of potential future private development scenarios for this property.
Vito Lopez.Earlier this month, in the brief few-day period when only one governor was embroiled in a sex scandal, Brooklyn Assemblyman Vito Lopez introduced a bill to use eminent domain to take pharmaceutical giant Pfizer’s approximately 15-acre manufacturing plant site in East Williamsburg and turn it into affordable housing (he's talked about this previously).
With the plant slated to close later this year, Pfizer had put out a search in January for developers to buy the land and build a mixed-use, mixed-income development out of the site.
Though the company has yet to report any progress along that front, and even that concept—of a mixed-income complex—angered Mr. Lopez, the Assembly housing committee chairman, who previously has expressed revulsion at the notion that the company would proceed down a path that would bring it any significant financial gain.
The bill, introduced March 13 with 20 other legislators signing on, instructs the Division of Housing and Community Renewal to take the property with eminent domain. In the bill’s justification listed on the Assembly’s Web site, Mr. Lopez said he was taking action on Pfizer because it failed to donate its land, as it has done in other instances. "Though Pfizer has shown concern for other communities coping with job loss and housing needs, it appears the global company has little interest in returning the land in question to the State of New York," the justification reads.
Assuming Mr. Lopez can read the tea leaves as well as any other veteran Albany legislator—one would imagine the bill has little chance of going anywhere—perhaps he is using it to push Pfizer to include more affordable housing in whatever becomes of the site.
Pfizer opposes the measure (who would have thought), and emailed this response:
Pfizer Inc strongly opposes A10272 (V. Lopez), a bill to allow the seizure of Pfizer-owned property in Brooklyn by eminent domain for the development of affordable housing by New York State. Not only is the concept of state-sponsored eminent domain extremely premature at this point and potentially chilling for development statewide, but the legislation’s justification fails to mention that affordable housing is one of the key uses currently being considered as part of potential future private development scenarios for this property.
Monday, February 18, 2008
All in the family
This little piggy went to the City Council.
His name was Erik Dilan.
This little piggy got paid $122,500 a year, but that wasn't good enough.
This little piggy got money for his wife, too. Because the money was available and because all the little piggies were getting theirs.
What we recount is, unfortunately, no fable. Rather it is fact, as documented by the Daily News I-Team, which has been digging aggressively into the City Council's gross misuse of so-called member items.
Dilan is among the many lawmakers who have been dipping into enormous slush funds as a way to distribute taxpayer moneys to favored organizations. The process has entailed phony official records, an utter lack of accountability, alleged thefts and blatant conflicts of interest.
A Council member designates a group for funds, declaring it does valuable community service of some kind. With the lightest of scrutiny, the city writes a check. There's no audit on how the money is eventually spent.
The recipients of Dilan's largess have included the North Brooklyn Community Council, a nonprofit organization based in a Bushwick storefront. Over the past three years, Dilan has directed a total of $187,500 to the group in increasing chunks of money, $30,000 then $57,500 then $100,000.
The organization lists only one salaried employee on tax forms: executive director Jannitza Luna. And, surprise, surprise, Luna became Dilan's fiancée in 2006 and his wife in 2007. According to the group's last tax return, Luna was paid $45,000 in 2006.
What she did for the money is unclear, as is what the organization has been doing. On the most recent city filing, it reported organizing youth sports teams, but Dilan said the group now focuses more on "immigrant services."
That all this passed muster in the City Council demonstrates anew that lawmakers have run wildly out of control with member items.
The City Charter requires Council members to disclose conflicts of interest, including whether family members would benefit from grants. Lawmakers must reveal conflicts on the record of Council meetings and, since last year, on special disclosure forms. (That the forms are riddled with grammatical errors is beside the point.)
Dilan appears to have made the required reports, going so far on his written document as to deny, laughably, that steering money to North Brooklyn represented a conflict.
He asserted that the group paid his wife not with city money, but using a separate slab of pork he got from the state through a political pal, Brooklyn Democratic boss Vito Lopez.
By Dilan's reckoning, then, he's in the clear. He followed all the rules, so it's appropriate to pour money into his wife's employer. But it shouldn't be okay. Abolish member items.
Tuesday, April 22nd 2008, 4:00 AM Daily News Editorial
His name was Erik Dilan.
This little piggy got paid $122,500 a year, but that wasn't good enough.
This little piggy got money for his wife, too. Because the money was available and because all the little piggies were getting theirs.
What we recount is, unfortunately, no fable. Rather it is fact, as documented by the Daily News I-Team, which has been digging aggressively into the City Council's gross misuse of so-called member items.
Dilan is among the many lawmakers who have been dipping into enormous slush funds as a way to distribute taxpayer moneys to favored organizations. The process has entailed phony official records, an utter lack of accountability, alleged thefts and blatant conflicts of interest.
A Council member designates a group for funds, declaring it does valuable community service of some kind. With the lightest of scrutiny, the city writes a check. There's no audit on how the money is eventually spent.
The recipients of Dilan's largess have included the North Brooklyn Community Council, a nonprofit organization based in a Bushwick storefront. Over the past three years, Dilan has directed a total of $187,500 to the group in increasing chunks of money, $30,000 then $57,500 then $100,000.
The organization lists only one salaried employee on tax forms: executive director Jannitza Luna. And, surprise, surprise, Luna became Dilan's fiancée in 2006 and his wife in 2007. According to the group's last tax return, Luna was paid $45,000 in 2006.
What she did for the money is unclear, as is what the organization has been doing. On the most recent city filing, it reported organizing youth sports teams, but Dilan said the group now focuses more on "immigrant services."
That all this passed muster in the City Council demonstrates anew that lawmakers have run wildly out of control with member items.
The City Charter requires Council members to disclose conflicts of interest, including whether family members would benefit from grants. Lawmakers must reveal conflicts on the record of Council meetings and, since last year, on special disclosure forms. (That the forms are riddled with grammatical errors is beside the point.)
Dilan appears to have made the required reports, going so far on his written document as to deny, laughably, that steering money to North Brooklyn represented a conflict.
He asserted that the group paid his wife not with city money, but using a separate slab of pork he got from the state through a political pal, Brooklyn Democratic boss Vito Lopez.
By Dilan's reckoning, then, he's in the clear. He followed all the rules, so it's appropriate to pour money into his wife's employer. But it shouldn't be okay. Abolish member items.
Tuesday, April 22nd 2008, 4:00 AM Daily News Editorial
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Buy a Judgeship INC
You would think that the disgrace of Brooklyn Democratic Party boss Clarence Norman would have at least slowed the gush of money from judicial candidates to his successor in the party machine. Think again.
When the Brooklyn Democrats elected Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez their new leader in October 2005, the already-powerful politician pledged to restore order to a party rocked by judicial corruption. He was replacing Clarence Norman, a prodigious fundraiser who had been convicted of abusing party funds and was accused of pressuring judges to hire party-picked workers.Although not dogged by charges of malfeasance, the new leader has certainly continued his predecessor’s practice of vigorously shaking his borough’s money trees. And an examination of the Friends of Vito Lopez campaign disclosure file at the state Board of Elections reveals that his donors include almost every borough candidate for the bench.Since his elevation last year, Lopez’s committee has collected $193,760 — including more than $6,000 in contributions from 18 different judges and judicial candidates. During the period of 1999 to 2005, Norman averaged roughly $4,400 from similar donors. (For year-to-year comparisons of judge giving, see today’s LexMetrics.)The dynamics are most stark in this year’s Supreme Court race. Of the 20 non-incumbent candidates approved by the Brooklyn screening panel last July, 15 gave at least $250 to the Friends of Vito Lopez at a fundraiser held a few weeks before the evaluation.According to an individual who attended the event and who demanded anonymity, Lopez held the event in the backroom of a pizzeria in Williamsburg. “They’ll send out an invite, usually you have food, drinks, and try to get as many people’s support as possible,” she explained. “You don’t want to be the person who doesn’t go.” The five candidates who did not contribute to the judicial kitty did not receive the party’s nomination.One of those losers was attorney Mark R. Dwyer, counsel to Robert M. Morgenthau, the Manhattan DA. “I’m not in the habit of making political contributions,” he said simply, declining to discuss what his failure to donate might have meant. When asked why he might have missed the Democratic fundraising boat, he responded, “I’ve never been involved in that circle.” Civil Court candidates also donated. These races are essentially settled during the September primary, because like the Supreme Court race, the party’s nod assures election victory in the overwhelmingly Democratic borough. In June, the Friends of Vito Lopez received contributions from both Dena Douglas and Jacqueline D. Williams — the two candidates who won the Democratic Party’s nomination to the Brooklyn Civil Court. Repeated calls to Assemblyman Lopez were not returned. In addition, several calls to his judicial contributors also went unreturned.Some observers feel that the Brooklyn scene didn’t change too much with the new leadership. Kent A. Yalowitz, an attorney at Arnold & Porter, spent months studying the Brooklyn Democratic machine. Yalowitz was one of the many attorneys leading Surrogate Judge Margarita Lopez Torres’s landmark lawsuit that overturned the Supreme Court selection system in New York.“It’s a fair inference that under the current regime, candidates need to curry favor with these people,” he explained. “From what I can tell, Assemblyman Lopez doesn’t represent a change in the philosophy.”The rules governing judicial campaign donations are in some ways more intricate than for other offices. According to Lee Daghlian, a spokesperson for the Board of Elections, most political campaign accounts can be kept open “forever,” but judicial campaign accounts must be closed shortly after the election. Additionally, incumbent justices are prohibited from contributing to political campaigns — a rule that Daghlian said has been in effect for at least 25 years: “It was for ethical reasons,” he said. “They wanted judges to be insulated from this process, particularly sitting judges.”This year, Lopez’s first test as party leader in Brooklyn, all five Supreme Court candidates backed by party leadership passed muster without a hint of struggle among the delegates who ultimately pick the justices at the convention. They will almost certainly win in the ceremonial election in November. And every successful Supreme Court candidate in Brooklyn, barring one incumbent, contributed at least $250 to a fundraiser for Lopez.
According to the 2006 Judicial Campaign Ethics Handbook, these contributions are permitted during a candidate's 'window period.' The window period commences nine months prior to the earliest of the following dates: (1) the date of formal nomination, or (2) the date of a party meeting at which the candidate would be endorsed, or (3) the date that the petition process begins.
If the person becomes a candidate in the general election, the window period ends six months after the general election. Otherwise, if the candidate loses the primary election, or fails to be nominated or endorsed in the applicable convention, caucus or party meeting, the window period ends six months thereafter.*
At the same time, the election window carefully limits the types of spending allowed: “During the judicial candidate’s window period, the candidate may (unless otherwise prohibited by law or rule) attend and speak at gatherings on his/her own behalf (including attending his/her own fund-raising event) and purchase two (2) tickets to and attend a politically-sponsored dinner or event, including a fund-raising event for other elected officials or candidates.”During the last seven years of election filings, several other judges ponied up to the Friends of Vito Lopez committee.In 2002, Brooklyn lawyer Eugene Hurkin and his household donated $600 to the Friends of Vito Lopez and, between 2001 and 2003, another $2,262 to the Committee to Re-Elect Clarence Norman. In 2001, his son, Allen Hurkin-Torres, donated $300 to Norman’s committee via his own election committee. That same year, Allen won a seat on the Supreme Court.Ironically, the recent federal ruling calling for reforms of the judicial nomination process might just increase the number — and amount — of judicial candidate donations to the Lopez machine. How that will affect Lopez’s relationship to individual members of the bench is an open question.In U.S. District judge John Gleeson’s January opinion in Lopez Torres vs. New York State Board of Elections, the judge overturned the state’s judicial selection system for the Supreme Court and ordered the state legislature to create a new one. Legislative action is expected early next year.In one scenario, the current system could be replaced by an open primary. That would probably jack up the price of judicial elections by hundreds of thousands of dollars.Conversely, the new system could follow the lead of other states — selecting judges based by merit systems, rather than elections, or creating alternative public funding for judicial races.In his 77-page decision, Judge Gleeson described Vito Lopez’s attempts to manipulate the career of Brooklyn Surrogate Margarita Lopez Torres: “If she hired [Vito] Lopez’s daughter, a recent law school graduate, as her court attorney, [Vito] Lopez would get Lopez Torres nominated to fill an upcoming vacancy on the Supreme Court that the party leadership had earmarked for a ‘Latino,’ ” Gleeson wrote, revealing the dark side of Vito Lopez’s
When the Brooklyn Democrats elected Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez their new leader in October 2005, the already-powerful politician pledged to restore order to a party rocked by judicial corruption. He was replacing Clarence Norman, a prodigious fundraiser who had been convicted of abusing party funds and was accused of pressuring judges to hire party-picked workers.Although not dogged by charges of malfeasance, the new leader has certainly continued his predecessor’s practice of vigorously shaking his borough’s money trees. And an examination of the Friends of Vito Lopez campaign disclosure file at the state Board of Elections reveals that his donors include almost every borough candidate for the bench.Since his elevation last year, Lopez’s committee has collected $193,760 — including more than $6,000 in contributions from 18 different judges and judicial candidates. During the period of 1999 to 2005, Norman averaged roughly $4,400 from similar donors. (For year-to-year comparisons of judge giving, see today’s LexMetrics.)The dynamics are most stark in this year’s Supreme Court race. Of the 20 non-incumbent candidates approved by the Brooklyn screening panel last July, 15 gave at least $250 to the Friends of Vito Lopez at a fundraiser held a few weeks before the evaluation.According to an individual who attended the event and who demanded anonymity, Lopez held the event in the backroom of a pizzeria in Williamsburg. “They’ll send out an invite, usually you have food, drinks, and try to get as many people’s support as possible,” she explained. “You don’t want to be the person who doesn’t go.” The five candidates who did not contribute to the judicial kitty did not receive the party’s nomination.One of those losers was attorney Mark R. Dwyer, counsel to Robert M. Morgenthau, the Manhattan DA. “I’m not in the habit of making political contributions,” he said simply, declining to discuss what his failure to donate might have meant. When asked why he might have missed the Democratic fundraising boat, he responded, “I’ve never been involved in that circle.” Civil Court candidates also donated. These races are essentially settled during the September primary, because like the Supreme Court race, the party’s nod assures election victory in the overwhelmingly Democratic borough. In June, the Friends of Vito Lopez received contributions from both Dena Douglas and Jacqueline D. Williams — the two candidates who won the Democratic Party’s nomination to the Brooklyn Civil Court. Repeated calls to Assemblyman Lopez were not returned. In addition, several calls to his judicial contributors also went unreturned.Some observers feel that the Brooklyn scene didn’t change too much with the new leadership. Kent A. Yalowitz, an attorney at Arnold & Porter, spent months studying the Brooklyn Democratic machine. Yalowitz was one of the many attorneys leading Surrogate Judge Margarita Lopez Torres’s landmark lawsuit that overturned the Supreme Court selection system in New York.“It’s a fair inference that under the current regime, candidates need to curry favor with these people,” he explained. “From what I can tell, Assemblyman Lopez doesn’t represent a change in the philosophy.”The rules governing judicial campaign donations are in some ways more intricate than for other offices. According to Lee Daghlian, a spokesperson for the Board of Elections, most political campaign accounts can be kept open “forever,” but judicial campaign accounts must be closed shortly after the election. Additionally, incumbent justices are prohibited from contributing to political campaigns — a rule that Daghlian said has been in effect for at least 25 years: “It was for ethical reasons,” he said. “They wanted judges to be insulated from this process, particularly sitting judges.”This year, Lopez’s first test as party leader in Brooklyn, all five Supreme Court candidates backed by party leadership passed muster without a hint of struggle among the delegates who ultimately pick the justices at the convention. They will almost certainly win in the ceremonial election in November. And every successful Supreme Court candidate in Brooklyn, barring one incumbent, contributed at least $250 to a fundraiser for Lopez.
According to the 2006 Judicial Campaign Ethics Handbook, these contributions are permitted during a candidate's 'window period.' The window period commences nine months prior to the earliest of the following dates: (1) the date of formal nomination, or (2) the date of a party meeting at which the candidate would be endorsed, or (3) the date that the petition process begins.
If the person becomes a candidate in the general election, the window period ends six months after the general election. Otherwise, if the candidate loses the primary election, or fails to be nominated or endorsed in the applicable convention, caucus or party meeting, the window period ends six months thereafter.*
At the same time, the election window carefully limits the types of spending allowed: “During the judicial candidate’s window period, the candidate may (unless otherwise prohibited by law or rule) attend and speak at gatherings on his/her own behalf (including attending his/her own fund-raising event) and purchase two (2) tickets to and attend a politically-sponsored dinner or event, including a fund-raising event for other elected officials or candidates.”During the last seven years of election filings, several other judges ponied up to the Friends of Vito Lopez committee.In 2002, Brooklyn lawyer Eugene Hurkin and his household donated $600 to the Friends of Vito Lopez and, between 2001 and 2003, another $2,262 to the Committee to Re-Elect Clarence Norman. In 2001, his son, Allen Hurkin-Torres, donated $300 to Norman’s committee via his own election committee. That same year, Allen won a seat on the Supreme Court.Ironically, the recent federal ruling calling for reforms of the judicial nomination process might just increase the number — and amount — of judicial candidate donations to the Lopez machine. How that will affect Lopez’s relationship to individual members of the bench is an open question.In U.S. District judge John Gleeson’s January opinion in Lopez Torres vs. New York State Board of Elections, the judge overturned the state’s judicial selection system for the Supreme Court and ordered the state legislature to create a new one. Legislative action is expected early next year.In one scenario, the current system could be replaced by an open primary. That would probably jack up the price of judicial elections by hundreds of thousands of dollars.Conversely, the new system could follow the lead of other states — selecting judges based by merit systems, rather than elections, or creating alternative public funding for judicial races.In his 77-page decision, Judge Gleeson described Vito Lopez’s attempts to manipulate the career of Brooklyn Surrogate Margarita Lopez Torres: “If she hired [Vito] Lopez’s daughter, a recent law school graduate, as her court attorney, [Vito] Lopez would get Lopez Torres nominated to fill an upcoming vacancy on the Supreme Court that the party leadership had earmarked for a ‘Latino,’ ” Gleeson wrote, revealing the dark side of Vito Lopez’s
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Pfizer Offering Williamsburg Plant Site for Affordable Housing—So, Why’s a State Assemblyman Trying to Seize It?
January 20, 2008
The New York Observer
Eliot Brown
All of Pfizer’s plans, however, could be for naught if State Assemblyman Vito Lopez is successful in a bid to claim the site with eminent domain and develop it for affordable housing. First reported in Crain’s New York Business, Mr. Lopez, a Brooklyn Democrat, has been drafting a bill that would have the state’s housing agency acquire the site, then issue its own request for proposals so as to create about 1,700 housing units.
Mr. Lopez, the chairman of the Assembly’s housing committee, has pushed for large levels of affordable housing, often irking city officials and other legislators who consider his demands unreasonable and unrealistic. His efforts, however, received a shout-out from Governor Spitzer in his State of the State address last week, in which he praised Mr. Lopez for his commitment to affordable housing.
Pfizer, in a candid statement, said the company finds it “extremely puzzling that a legislator would propose a government seizure of private property through eminent domain to ostensibly re-develop the properties with the same types of uses we are already considering.”
article
The New York Observer
Eliot Brown
All of Pfizer’s plans, however, could be for naught if State Assemblyman Vito Lopez is successful in a bid to claim the site with eminent domain and develop it for affordable housing. First reported in Crain’s New York Business, Mr. Lopez, a Brooklyn Democrat, has been drafting a bill that would have the state’s housing agency acquire the site, then issue its own request for proposals so as to create about 1,700 housing units.
Mr. Lopez, the chairman of the Assembly’s housing committee, has pushed for large levels of affordable housing, often irking city officials and other legislators who consider his demands unreasonable and unrealistic. His efforts, however, received a shout-out from Governor Spitzer in his State of the State address last week, in which he praised Mr. Lopez for his commitment to affordable housing.
Pfizer, in a candid statement, said the company finds it “extremely puzzling that a legislator would propose a government seizure of private property through eminent domain to ostensibly re-develop the properties with the same types of uses we are already considering.”
article
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Voter Registration Coverup?
LOPEZ, VITO J
THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
NEW YORK VOTER REGISTRATIONS
Name: LOPEZ, VITO J
Address:
64 CONSELYEA STREET 1 FL.
BROOKLYN, NY 11211
County: KINGS
Date of Birth: 6/5/1941
Gender: MALE
VOTER INFORMATION
Party Affiliation: DEMOCRATIC
Registration Date: 1/1/1984
Date Last Voted: 11/2/2004
Congressional District: 12
State Senate District: 17
State House District: 53
Precinct: 01
VOTING HISTORY
PRIMARY ELECTION 2002: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2002: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 2001: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2001: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 2000: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2000: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 1997: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 1997: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 1996: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 1996: VOTED
64 CONSELYEA STREET 1 FL. Was own by the director Lilly Tarantino of a non profit called Swing 60’s Senior Center – According to the buzz it was one room that Vito rented in that private home.
One week after the Post article below Vito moved to Stanhope Street to a larger apartment.
Norman's Successor Facing Own Scandal
By Jim Hinch
New York Post
November, 25, 2005
Just one month after replacing scandal-plagued pol Clarence Norman as Brooklyn Democratic Party boss, Assemblyman Vito Lopez appears headed for his own tub of legal hot water.
Three activists have filed a complaint with the Brooklyn DA, alleging Lopez used a fake address on his voter-registration form and doesn't live in his Brooklyn district.
Instead, say the activists, Lopez for years has shacked up in a Queens condo owned by his Former Brooklyn Democratic party bossgirlfriend, Planning Commissioner Angela
Clarence Norman (above) was indicted Battaglia, who also happens to be executive
for four offenses. director of a housing nonprofit Lopez founded.
A spokesman confirmed that the district attorney had received the complaint, dated Oct. 24, but declined to say if an investigation has begun.
Falsifying a voter-registration address is a felony.
When told of the complaint, Lopez's chief of staff, Allison Hirsh, said, "I have no comment," and hung up the phone. Battaglia did not return a phone call to her commission office.
"Vito Lopez is not above the law," said Joseph Garber, one of three signatories on the complaint.
Garber, an activist in Lopez's district who has worked against Lopez-backed judicial candidates, said the pol's alleged fake address has been an open secret among insiders for years.
Garber said he and other disgusted activists decided to air the dirty laundry when Lopez ascended to Norman's throne atop the Kings County Democratic Party in October with vows to clean the organization up.
"Now Lopez is going to be the choirmaster. He'll do just like Clarence Norman, if not worse," said Arthur Steier, another signatory.
Since becoming party leader, Lopez has been throwing his weight around, recently vowing to be a kingmaker in the race for City Council speaker.
Property records show that the address where Lopez is registered to vote, 64 Conselyea St. in Williamsburg, is owned by a woman named Tillie Tarantino.
Tarantino is executive director of the Swinging 60s Senior Center in Greenpoint, which is funded by a Lopez-backed nonprofit.
Reached by The Post at the senior center, Tarantino was asked if Lopez lives at the Conselyea Street house.
"No comment," she said, and hung up
The New York Post
October 1, 2005 Saturday
SECTION: Sports+Late City Final; Pg. 2
LENGTH: 140 words
HEADLINE: DEM FOES CALL BROOKLYN POL OUT AT HOME
BYLINE: Jim Hinch
BODY:
Political opponents of Brooklyn Assemblyman Vito Lopez are preparing to file a complaint with prosecutors that Lopez does not live at the house where he is registered to vote, but instead is shacking up with his girlfriend in Queens.
Lopez was lobbying hard this week to replace recently convicted Assemblyman Clarence Norman as Brooklyn's Democratic Party leader.
Allies of civil court judge candidate Martin Needleman, whom Lopez opposed in last month's primary, say Lopez will need to clean up his own act before replacing the tainted county leader.
Calls to Lopez's district office were not returned.
Lopez is registered to vote at a house on Conselyea Street in Williamsburg. But property records show the house is owned by Tillie Tarantino, who heads a senior citizens center operated by a nonprofit Lopez founded.
THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
NEW YORK VOTER REGISTRATIONS
Name: LOPEZ, VITO J
Address:
64 CONSELYEA STREET 1 FL.
BROOKLYN, NY 11211
County: KINGS
Date of Birth: 6/5/1941
Gender: MALE
VOTER INFORMATION
Party Affiliation: DEMOCRATIC
Registration Date: 1/1/1984
Date Last Voted: 11/2/2004
Congressional District: 12
State Senate District: 17
State House District: 53
Precinct: 01
VOTING HISTORY
PRIMARY ELECTION 2002: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2002: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 2001: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2001: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 2000: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 2000: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 1997: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 1997: VOTED
PRIMARY ELECTION 1996: VOTED
GENERAL ELECTION 1996: VOTED
64 CONSELYEA STREET 1 FL. Was own by the director Lilly Tarantino of a non profit called Swing 60’s Senior Center – According to the buzz it was one room that Vito rented in that private home.
One week after the Post article below Vito moved to Stanhope Street to a larger apartment.
Norman's Successor Facing Own Scandal
By Jim Hinch
New York Post
November, 25, 2005
Just one month after replacing scandal-plagued pol Clarence Norman as Brooklyn Democratic Party boss, Assemblyman Vito Lopez appears headed for his own tub of legal hot water.
Three activists have filed a complaint with the Brooklyn DA, alleging Lopez used a fake address on his voter-registration form and doesn't live in his Brooklyn district.
Instead, say the activists, Lopez for years has shacked up in a Queens condo owned by his Former Brooklyn Democratic party bossgirlfriend, Planning Commissioner Angela
Clarence Norman (above) was indicted Battaglia, who also happens to be executive
for four offenses. director of a housing nonprofit Lopez founded.
A spokesman confirmed that the district attorney had received the complaint, dated Oct. 24, but declined to say if an investigation has begun.
Falsifying a voter-registration address is a felony.
When told of the complaint, Lopez's chief of staff, Allison Hirsh, said, "I have no comment," and hung up the phone. Battaglia did not return a phone call to her commission office.
"Vito Lopez is not above the law," said Joseph Garber, one of three signatories on the complaint.
Garber, an activist in Lopez's district who has worked against Lopez-backed judicial candidates, said the pol's alleged fake address has been an open secret among insiders for years.
Garber said he and other disgusted activists decided to air the dirty laundry when Lopez ascended to Norman's throne atop the Kings County Democratic Party in October with vows to clean the organization up.
"Now Lopez is going to be the choirmaster. He'll do just like Clarence Norman, if not worse," said Arthur Steier, another signatory.
Since becoming party leader, Lopez has been throwing his weight around, recently vowing to be a kingmaker in the race for City Council speaker.
Property records show that the address where Lopez is registered to vote, 64 Conselyea St. in Williamsburg, is owned by a woman named Tillie Tarantino.
Tarantino is executive director of the Swinging 60s Senior Center in Greenpoint, which is funded by a Lopez-backed nonprofit.
Reached by The Post at the senior center, Tarantino was asked if Lopez lives at the Conselyea Street house.
"No comment," she said, and hung up
The New York Post
October 1, 2005 Saturday
SECTION: Sports+Late City Final; Pg. 2
LENGTH: 140 words
HEADLINE: DEM FOES CALL BROOKLYN POL OUT AT HOME
BYLINE: Jim Hinch
BODY:
Political opponents of Brooklyn Assemblyman Vito Lopez are preparing to file a complaint with prosecutors that Lopez does not live at the house where he is registered to vote, but instead is shacking up with his girlfriend in Queens.
Lopez was lobbying hard this week to replace recently convicted Assemblyman Clarence Norman as Brooklyn's Democratic Party leader.
Allies of civil court judge candidate Martin Needleman, whom Lopez opposed in last month's primary, say Lopez will need to clean up his own act before replacing the tainted county leader.
Calls to Lopez's district office were not returned.
Lopez is registered to vote at a house on Conselyea Street in Williamsburg. But property records show the house is owned by Tillie Tarantino, who heads a senior citizens center operated by a nonprofit Lopez founded.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Vito Uses Slush to Fight Cancer
A top Brooklyn pol uses the pork barrel against cancer
December 26th, 2006 from the Village Voice
by Tom Robbins
The Voice questions how legislators (and Vito Lopez in particular) have a free hand in the pork barrel to benefit themselves as much as their constituents.
There's the $5,000 grant approved for Bobbi and the Strays, the Ozone Park, Queens, group that finds lost pets; there's the $10,000 for the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks in upstate Cohoes so the lodge can fix its ailing HVAC system; there's the $2,500 to erect permanent signage in Dag Hammarskjold Plaza in midtown; and the $2,000 for the German American Club in Albany so the group can finally pave its parking lot.
New York's media have always had a field day with the state legislature's "member items"the $200 million slush fund out of which legislators are allocated a set amount of funds (calculated according to political clout) to spend pretty much as they please. This good old-fashioned pork-barrel spending is the kind of thing that greases political wheels, even if taxpayers might not see it as urgently needed. Traditionally, assembly and senate leaders kept the names of the givers secret, a move that necessitated a bit of a guessing game as to which member was responsible for which item.
But the guessing game ended abruptly this fall when the Albany Times-Union won a lawsuit to compel the legislature to identify the names of the lawmakers and their individual largesse. A new round of stories was sparked this month when the assembly and the senate published files showing who gave what over the last three fiscal years on their respective websites. The lists show that Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno were the biggest givers, doling out millions to their own favorite charities. Bruno even gave $500,000 to a for-profit technology firm headed by a close pala gift now under FBI scrutiny.
Most lawmakers, however, received far less to distribute, and the records show they spread their limited loot around their districts in increments of $1,000 to $5,000. The money goes mainly for respectable civic endeavors: volunteer fire and ambulance departments, community patrols, neighborhood improvement associations, libraries, schools, legal services, and veterans' needs.
By that standard, the $50,000 a year for leukemia research allocated by Brooklyn Democratic assemblyman Vito Lopez is one of the larger individual grants, as well as one that seems to put him squarely on the side of the angels. But it also dramatically demonstrates how legislators have been given a free hand to choose good deeds that benefit themselves as much as their constituents.
Lopez, who last year became the powerful leader of Brooklyn's Democratic Party, earmarked the money for the prestigious Sloan-Kettering Institute, an arm of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, a world-renowned facility.
The state grants have gone toward a study of the glucose transporter function, which was described by Dr. Mark Heaney, a leukemia specialist at Sloan-Kettering, as "an effort to study ways that cancer cells differ from normal cells in leukemia patients." In a written statement to the Voice, Heaney said, "We hope this research will one day lead to a therapy for leukemia patients."
That's something in which Lopez has an intensely personal stake. The 65-year-old assemblyman suffers from leukemia himself and has been a patient at Memorial Sloan-Kettering since 1993, when he was first diagnosed with the ailment. In an interview, Lopez, who was first elected to the assembly in 1984, said that he began making the grants shortly after he underwent treatment at the center. "I went in and got treated with heavy doses of chemotherapy, three different regimens. The last time, I almost didn't make it through," he said. "The hospital had a research project that dealt with some vitamins, and they came to me and said they needed probably a million dollars for research. And I submitted it."
Lopez said he had provided the $50,000 grants to Sloan-Kettering every year for the past decade. Initially he made them together with another Brooklyn assembly member, Eileen Dugan, who was also treated for cancer at Sloan-Kettering. Dugan died in 1996. Since then, Lopez has made the grants on his own. He said that he failed to allocate the funding to Sloan-Kettering in the current fiscal year only because he had been absent from the assembly for several months after having a heart operation.
The doctor who originally approached him for the research funding, Lopez said, was the same one overseeing his cancer therapy at the time. That doctor has since died. But Lopez, whose cancer has been in remission for 10 years, said that most of his recent checkups at the hospital have been handled by Heaney, who was listed as the research project director for the grants on the legislative forms submitted by Lopez and approved by the assembly.
"This was a renewal of an ongoing grant," said Joanne Nicholas, a spokesperson for Memorial Sloan-Kettering. "When Dr. Heaney took over the lab two years ago, the grant was already in place. It is a wonderful thing that Mr. Lopez is doing," she added.
Lopez reacted angrily to questions about his giving. He said that he had never undergone any experimental treatments himself and that he had supplied the funding because he had become "more sensitive" to the need for cancer research. "You are going to taint this because I went to the hospital?" he said. "How do you make that dirty? It's remarkable. They get it, and that's about it. I don't have much more to tell you. I guess the legislature gives research money out on a broad level. It was never a major thing."
But the grant stands out for other reasons.
Lopez represents the neighborhoods of Bushwick and Williamsburg, an area that includes some of the city's poorest areas and is located miles away from Memorial Sloan-Kettering, which is on Manhattan's wealthy Upper East Side. There are plenty of cancer sufferers in Lopez's district, but the disease doesn't strike residents in the area any more often than those in the rest of the city, health studies show. The biggest local health problem, according to a 2006 survey by the city's department of health, is asthma: Hospitalization rates for asthma attacks suffered by both children and adults in the area are double that of the rest of Brooklyn, as well as the city as a whole. Infant mortality rates are also higher than the city average, the study found. When it comes to cancer, the most alarming local health indicator, analysts determined, is that more than half of adult males in the district have not undergone colonoscopies, the all-important safeguard against colon cancer.
Lopez chairs the assembly's influential housing committee and serves on committees for economic development, rules, and social services. But he said that health has been an important issue for him as a legislator. "I sign on to every bill that talks about health, about helping people through illnesses. Is that because I became ill? Perhaps." The newly released records show that as a member of Brooklyn's assembly delegation, Lopez has joined his colleagues in steering funds to other cancer prevention programs, such as providing mammograms for uninsured women. But those grants are for small amounts of $1,000 or $2,000 apiece, and the cost is apportioned among each of the legislators.
Had he ever considered sending his annual $50,000 to other cancer research facilities? "No one has ever asked me," he responded.
The member-item data show that Lopez also didn't search very hard in choosing where else to send his annual funding. Aside from the $50,000 to Sloan-Kettering, the rest of Lopez's individual member-item grants in recent years have gone to a large nonprofit community organization in his district with which he is closely connected. Lopez has sent $130,000 annually, in three separate grants, to the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council and one of its affiliates, the North Brooklyn Residents Association. For many years Lopez was a paid consultant to the organization. He also lives with the organization's $116,000-a-year housing director, Angela Battaglia.
Had he ever considered that as a possible ethical conflict? "No. Absolutely not," Lopez said. "I will help and continue to help programs that do a good job. That's how I feel about it. And that's a direct quote."
December 26th, 2006 from the Village Voice
by Tom Robbins
The Voice questions how legislators (and Vito Lopez in particular) have a free hand in the pork barrel to benefit themselves as much as their constituents.
There's the $5,000 grant approved for Bobbi and the Strays, the Ozone Park, Queens, group that finds lost pets; there's the $10,000 for the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks in upstate Cohoes so the lodge can fix its ailing HVAC system; there's the $2,500 to erect permanent signage in Dag Hammarskjold Plaza in midtown; and the $2,000 for the German American Club in Albany so the group can finally pave its parking lot.
New York's media have always had a field day with the state legislature's "member items"the $200 million slush fund out of which legislators are allocated a set amount of funds (calculated according to political clout) to spend pretty much as they please. This good old-fashioned pork-barrel spending is the kind of thing that greases political wheels, even if taxpayers might not see it as urgently needed. Traditionally, assembly and senate leaders kept the names of the givers secret, a move that necessitated a bit of a guessing game as to which member was responsible for which item.
But the guessing game ended abruptly this fall when the Albany Times-Union won a lawsuit to compel the legislature to identify the names of the lawmakers and their individual largesse. A new round of stories was sparked this month when the assembly and the senate published files showing who gave what over the last three fiscal years on their respective websites. The lists show that Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno were the biggest givers, doling out millions to their own favorite charities. Bruno even gave $500,000 to a for-profit technology firm headed by a close pala gift now under FBI scrutiny.
Most lawmakers, however, received far less to distribute, and the records show they spread their limited loot around their districts in increments of $1,000 to $5,000. The money goes mainly for respectable civic endeavors: volunteer fire and ambulance departments, community patrols, neighborhood improvement associations, libraries, schools, legal services, and veterans' needs.
By that standard, the $50,000 a year for leukemia research allocated by Brooklyn Democratic assemblyman Vito Lopez is one of the larger individual grants, as well as one that seems to put him squarely on the side of the angels. But it also dramatically demonstrates how legislators have been given a free hand to choose good deeds that benefit themselves as much as their constituents.
Lopez, who last year became the powerful leader of Brooklyn's Democratic Party, earmarked the money for the prestigious Sloan-Kettering Institute, an arm of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, a world-renowned facility.
The state grants have gone toward a study of the glucose transporter function, which was described by Dr. Mark Heaney, a leukemia specialist at Sloan-Kettering, as "an effort to study ways that cancer cells differ from normal cells in leukemia patients." In a written statement to the Voice, Heaney said, "We hope this research will one day lead to a therapy for leukemia patients."
That's something in which Lopez has an intensely personal stake. The 65-year-old assemblyman suffers from leukemia himself and has been a patient at Memorial Sloan-Kettering since 1993, when he was first diagnosed with the ailment. In an interview, Lopez, who was first elected to the assembly in 1984, said that he began making the grants shortly after he underwent treatment at the center. "I went in and got treated with heavy doses of chemotherapy, three different regimens. The last time, I almost didn't make it through," he said. "The hospital had a research project that dealt with some vitamins, and they came to me and said they needed probably a million dollars for research. And I submitted it."
Lopez said he had provided the $50,000 grants to Sloan-Kettering every year for the past decade. Initially he made them together with another Brooklyn assembly member, Eileen Dugan, who was also treated for cancer at Sloan-Kettering. Dugan died in 1996. Since then, Lopez has made the grants on his own. He said that he failed to allocate the funding to Sloan-Kettering in the current fiscal year only because he had been absent from the assembly for several months after having a heart operation.
The doctor who originally approached him for the research funding, Lopez said, was the same one overseeing his cancer therapy at the time. That doctor has since died. But Lopez, whose cancer has been in remission for 10 years, said that most of his recent checkups at the hospital have been handled by Heaney, who was listed as the research project director for the grants on the legislative forms submitted by Lopez and approved by the assembly.
"This was a renewal of an ongoing grant," said Joanne Nicholas, a spokesperson for Memorial Sloan-Kettering. "When Dr. Heaney took over the lab two years ago, the grant was already in place. It is a wonderful thing that Mr. Lopez is doing," she added.
Lopez reacted angrily to questions about his giving. He said that he had never undergone any experimental treatments himself and that he had supplied the funding because he had become "more sensitive" to the need for cancer research. "You are going to taint this because I went to the hospital?" he said. "How do you make that dirty? It's remarkable. They get it, and that's about it. I don't have much more to tell you. I guess the legislature gives research money out on a broad level. It was never a major thing."
But the grant stands out for other reasons.
Lopez represents the neighborhoods of Bushwick and Williamsburg, an area that includes some of the city's poorest areas and is located miles away from Memorial Sloan-Kettering, which is on Manhattan's wealthy Upper East Side. There are plenty of cancer sufferers in Lopez's district, but the disease doesn't strike residents in the area any more often than those in the rest of the city, health studies show. The biggest local health problem, according to a 2006 survey by the city's department of health, is asthma: Hospitalization rates for asthma attacks suffered by both children and adults in the area are double that of the rest of Brooklyn, as well as the city as a whole. Infant mortality rates are also higher than the city average, the study found. When it comes to cancer, the most alarming local health indicator, analysts determined, is that more than half of adult males in the district have not undergone colonoscopies, the all-important safeguard against colon cancer.
Lopez chairs the assembly's influential housing committee and serves on committees for economic development, rules, and social services. But he said that health has been an important issue for him as a legislator. "I sign on to every bill that talks about health, about helping people through illnesses. Is that because I became ill? Perhaps." The newly released records show that as a member of Brooklyn's assembly delegation, Lopez has joined his colleagues in steering funds to other cancer prevention programs, such as providing mammograms for uninsured women. But those grants are for small amounts of $1,000 or $2,000 apiece, and the cost is apportioned among each of the legislators.
Had he ever considered sending his annual $50,000 to other cancer research facilities? "No one has ever asked me," he responded.
The member-item data show that Lopez also didn't search very hard in choosing where else to send his annual funding. Aside from the $50,000 to Sloan-Kettering, the rest of Lopez's individual member-item grants in recent years have gone to a large nonprofit community organization in his district with which he is closely connected. Lopez has sent $130,000 annually, in three separate grants, to the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council and one of its affiliates, the North Brooklyn Residents Association. For many years Lopez was a paid consultant to the organization. He also lives with the organization's $116,000-a-year housing director, Angela Battaglia.
Had he ever considered that as a possible ethical conflict? "No. Absolutely not," Lopez said. "I will help and continue to help programs that do a good job. That's how I feel about it. And that's a direct quote."
POL BENEFIT$ FROM STATE-AIDED GROUP
A powerful Brooklyn lawmaker who has delivered millions of dollars in state aid to his district is also on the payroll of one of the community groups he has funded - but won't say what he's paid to do.
Assemblyman Vito Lopez (D-Bushwick) has been a consultant to a not-for-profit housing group since 1998, earning as much as $57,600 a year, according to tax records and check stubs obtained by The Post.
Lopez's consulting fees come on top of the $92,000 annual salary he earns as a state lawmaker and committee chairman.
When asked about his role as a consultant and any possible conflict with his position as chairman of the Assembly's Housing Committee, Lopez erupted in a bizarre tirade.
"On Tuesday we're feeding 2,000 senior citizens, what are you doing?" he snapped.
"How much do you get paid?" Lopez continued. "Unless you tell me how much you get paid and what you're doing on Christmas, I won't answer your questions."
Yet even when that information was provided, Lopez still refused to discuss his consulting work or explain what the housing-management group does in his district.
Lopez even suggested The Post's questions be posed to one of his daughters. He later tried to say he was joking with that suggestion.
Lopez is among Gov. Pataki's strongest supporters in the city. He has boasted of the tens of millions of dollars that he has brought to his district annually for housing and other programs.
Groups he has founded depend heavily on state largess. His Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center, an umbrella group for many of the district's not-for-profits, receives $7 million a year in public funds.
Community Property Management Inc. operates housing built or rehabilitated by groups affiliated with the Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center. Officials at the management group did not return calls for comment.
In filings with the state's Legislative Ethics Committee, Lopez, as required by law, declared his consulting work for Community Property Management during 1998, 1999 and 2000.
In those filings, Lopez described the work as providing technical assistance for program development, but was not required to state his income.
Source Citation: "POL BENEFIT$ FROM STATE-AIDED GROUP.(News)." New York Post (New York, NY) (Dec 23, 2001): 16. New York Times and New York Post (2000-present). Thomson Gale. New York Public Library. 20 Jan. 2007
.
Assemblyman Vito Lopez (D-Bushwick) has been a consultant to a not-for-profit housing group since 1998, earning as much as $57,600 a year, according to tax records and check stubs obtained by The Post.
Lopez's consulting fees come on top of the $92,000 annual salary he earns as a state lawmaker and committee chairman.
When asked about his role as a consultant and any possible conflict with his position as chairman of the Assembly's Housing Committee, Lopez erupted in a bizarre tirade.
"On Tuesday we're feeding 2,000 senior citizens, what are you doing?" he snapped.
"How much do you get paid?" Lopez continued. "Unless you tell me how much you get paid and what you're doing on Christmas, I won't answer your questions."
Yet even when that information was provided, Lopez still refused to discuss his consulting work or explain what the housing-management group does in his district.
Lopez even suggested The Post's questions be posed to one of his daughters. He later tried to say he was joking with that suggestion.
Lopez is among Gov. Pataki's strongest supporters in the city. He has boasted of the tens of millions of dollars that he has brought to his district annually for housing and other programs.
Groups he has founded depend heavily on state largess. His Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center, an umbrella group for many of the district's not-for-profits, receives $7 million a year in public funds.
Community Property Management Inc. operates housing built or rehabilitated by groups affiliated with the Bushwick-Ridgewood Senior Citizens Center. Officials at the management group did not return calls for comment.
In filings with the state's Legislative Ethics Committee, Lopez, as required by law, declared his consulting work for Community Property Management during 1998, 1999 and 2000.
In those filings, Lopez described the work as providing technical assistance for program development, but was not required to state his income.
Source Citation: "POL BENEFIT$ FROM STATE-AIDED GROUP.(News)." New York Post (New York, NY) (Dec 23, 2001): 16. New York Times and New York Post (2000-present). Thomson Gale. New York Public Library. 20 Jan. 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)