6 responses

  1. HKRes
    June 24, 2013

    Yes Mr. Bergman you can lament the lack of transparency in the legislative process with a shrug and a "whadda ya gonna do?" attitude but you are an appointed Community Board Member and YOU can do something about it.
    IF YOU WANTED TO.
    Let's then forget about trying to reform the Assembly at the moment and hold the Trust and Madelyn Wils transparent. In the 2 years since Ms. Wils was selected by Mike Bloomberg and Trust Chair (his girlfriend)
    Diana Taylor, Ms. Wils ran up and down the west side saying the pier is falling, we need 100's of Millions Dollars, we need Housing on Pier 40 and 79 and don't worry we will be transparent and the community will be informed and have been every step of the way on the changes to the Act.
    Readers of the Villager know that not to be true.
    That she was shamed into providing details of the development they were seeking, as well as open community meetings.
    Provided contradicted financials, and flamed divisions within the community.
    So let's start there. Gottfried and Glick did not come up with this legislation.
    It starts with Ms. Wils and the Trust.
    Gottfried and Glick sopped up to the Trust's plan to have the power to award these air rights.
    Madelyn Wils' hired lobbyist has this inserted without Community outreach and two of the BIG Winners in this
    insiders sweetheart deal is a current member of the Trust Board and one resent Board member who was selected to move from the Trust Board to chair the Park's fundraising arm-Friends of Hudson River Park -Joe Rose and Michael Novogratz. So Novogratz who's company owns the mammoth property opposite Pier 40 stand to reap huge holding now and guess who gets to award them….the chair of the Trust is Mike Bloombergs "girlfriend" Diana Taylor who selected Novogratz to chair the Friends organization.

    AND we also get the permanent placement of the heliport -Thank YOU Mr. Gottfried for that sweet deal you made to keep it in your district-over the objection of your constituents.
    Cause after years of litigation and a judgement FOR the neighborhood, which enforced the Hudson River Park Act and gave more than ample time to have Pegasus Air out of Hudson River Park, You Mr. Gottfried changed the legislation undoing the court order to allow the defendant business to decide when and IF it wants to move -WHERE it want to move. Giving Pegasus Air all the leverage in the settlement that THEY LOST!
    Mr. Gottfried claims that there will be pressure to have them move.
    More pressure than the judgement of a state Court?
    Perhaps Mr. Gottfried and Ms Glick can fund the next case against them next year all the while the community is still hammered by air traffic noise and development sprawl….while STILL waiting for Hudson River Park to appear north of 29th Street.
    Time to clear out the cronyism of the Hudson River Park Trust and Administration.
    With the deals they have been making the last thing they need is the millions of dollars tax they are trying to push
    through aka the Neighborhood Improvement District.

  2. Warren
    June 25, 2013

    The air rights have been under discussion for years. But the overarching fact is that there is no action at this moment or as a result of this new legislation.

    The Hudson River Park Trust cannot act outside of zoning regulations.

    Any possible use of air rights absolutely requires city approval and community discussions.

    This is the first step pin an incremental process.

    • Patrick Shields
      June 25, 2013

      In other words, a difficult and overdue result for Pier 40 just became even more contentious and impossible. Taking a single pier solution into the realm of air rights and preservation all along the park has kicked this can so dangerously far down the road. This was a stealth maneuver, written while our Assemblymember was working on the equality act. This is an abject failure for the community. The disastrously anti-union stipulations buried at the end, alone make it clear who authored this bill. For those who are wondering, a judge can now prohibit UNION ACTIVITY beyond our lifetimes, in any hotel, meeting or hospitality space, throughout the Hudson River Park. This is a MASSIVE, park-wide, ANTI-UNION clause, pushed by our supposedly pro-union west side representatives. This is what we get when we "rely on the people we elect to legislate, for better or for worse.” I'm sorry, but that is unacceptable Tobi.

      S 11. Section 14 of chapter 592 of the laws of 1998, constituting the
      Hudson River park act, is amended by adding a new subdivision 4 to read
      as follows:
      4. SHOULD THIS ACT PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND USE OF A
      HOTEL OR MEETING SPACE WITHIN ANY PORTION OF THE PARK, THE TRUST OR THE
      CONTRACTOR OR SUB-CONTRACTOR OF SUCH PROJECT SHALL ENTER INTO A VALID
      AGREEMENT ENFORCEABLE UNDER 29 U.S.C.S 185 WITH EACH LABOR ORGANIZATION
      THAT IS ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN REPRESENTING OR ATTEMPTING TO REPRESENT
      HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY WORKERS IN THE STATE. SUCH AGREEMENT SHALL, AT A
      MINIMUM, PROTECT THE TRUST'S PROPRIETARY INTERESTS BY PROHIBITING THE
      LABOR ORGANIZATION AND ITS MEMBERS FROM ENGAGING IN PICKETING, WORK
      STOPPAGES, BOYCOTTS, AND ANY OTHER ECONOMIC INTERFERENCE WITH THE
      OPERATION OF THE FACILITY OR ASSOCIATED HOSPITALITY OPERATIONS FOR THE
      DURATION OF THE TRUST'S PROPRIETARY INTEREST.

      (I WANT TO KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHO INSERTED THIS CLAUSE…!!)

      Patrick Shields
      Union Member
      Greenwich Village

      • HKres
        June 26, 2013

        Patrick Shield is right to be outraged by this Anti-Union action and I'm not sure why out Democratic Elected officials vote this anti-union provision and they need to help accountable.
        As to WHO pushed for this…my vote is the staunchly ANTI-UNION CHAIR of the Trust Diana Taylor.
        we all remember the video posted in the NY Times of Ms. Taylor confronted by union members at an open Trust Board meeting over the Sotherby's lockout where she vowed she would resign from the Board of the auction house IF the union got ONE concession during the negotiation. Ms. Taylor, the mayor's girlfriend, did not resign when management and union came to a new agreement but The Trust and Ms. Wils, who still thinks she's working for Bloombergs EDC, effectively hired a lobbyist and that's why this was all done behind closed doors and in the dead of night.
        Anyone who was even thinking that the Neighborhood Improvement District might have been a good idea should rethink handing over millions of dollars annually to the Trust or Ms. Wils because there is absolutely no transparency and NO accountability.
        Thank You Patrick for calling attention to the Union Busting language of this bill.
        MS. Glick and Dick Gottfried need to be help accountable for this slap to an important Democratic constituency.

  3. Patrick Shields
    June 25, 2013

    Another response to this should be that it "being under discussion for years" in no way constitutes community approval, or alters the fact that this gigantic step, this is a law we're talking about, was written, and passed without community approval, or even knowledge. The closer a reading you give it, the clearer it becomes how long this was in the works.

    • HKres
      June 26, 2013

      It's how MS. Wils sold Mr. Diller his contribution, Mr. Novogratz his chairmanship of Friends and a gift to Trust Board member who stand to gain from his property holdings at 29th St.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 


5 + three =

Back to top
mobile desktop