 |
 January 9, 2000 Supplemental material |
The following is a memo from Assemblymember Pete Grannis to State Senator Olga Mendez, discussing changes he proposes for a self-governance legislation for Roosevelt Island. December 23, 1999 MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Re: Enclosed is a draft of the amended version of the Roosevelt Island self-governance legislation. As you will see, the amendments I am proposing not only reflect my concerns with the bill, which I previously detailed in my July 30,1999 memorandum to Senator Mendez and reiterated again at the October 5th Town Hall meeting on the Island (copies of which are attached), but also addresses concerns I have heard from community residents. Included in this draft is language that will give statutory authority to the very important announcement by Senator Mendez at the Town Hall meeting that she had secured a commitment from Governor Pataki to cover the Island's capital needs that exceed $500,000. It has been my experience on legislation such as this that unless you have all aspects of an agreement codified into law or regulation, side agreements even with the governor are problematic at best, and certainly not enforceable in the event of a change in administrations. A good example was the agreement we struck with former Governor Mario Cuomo and his Housing Commissioner to have the president of the Roosevelt Island Residents Association as one of the governor's appointments to the Roosevelt Island Operating Corporations' Board of Directors. With the changes contained in this draft, I believe that Island residents will have the safeguards necessary to ensure a successful transition to self-governance. Highlighted below are the major areas of concern with S.5893 followed by a description of my proposed amendments. Obviously, all of these are open issues for discussion. 1) Concern: Although changing the board of directors from one that is totally controlled by gubernatorial appointments to one that has five of the seven directors elected Island-wide as proposed in S.5893 would be a vast improvement in terms of self- governance, there is a risk that board members elected in this fashion might not be truly representative of the Island's diverse population. To assure a representative board, I have changed the board's composition so that it reflects the balance that now governs membership on RIRA's Common Council, with representatives from each building complex. This Island-wide balance on the Common Council was considered important by Island residents and approved by an Island wide vote. It would seem appropriate that the same standard be reflected on RIOC's board.
With this amendment the board is expanded from seven to thirteen directors. Eleven of these shall be Island residents, with seven to be elected by building as follows: two from Eastwood; two from Manhattan Park; one from Island House; one from Rivercross; and one from Westview. The president of the Roosevelt Island Residents Association and the first vice-president, both of whom are elected Island-wide, will hold two seats. The remaining two resident directors will be appointed by the Mayor as currently happens and continues in S.5893. Since under my amendments, the state will continue to be on the line for allocating funds for the Island's capital needs, I believe that it is necessary for the Director of the Budget and the Commissioner of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal to continue to serve as directors. (A variation of this not in the enclosed draft might be to empower the board to eliminate these two positions upon a formal determination that the Island's future capital needs can be met without any future state assistance.) The board will be expanded as Southtown is developed as follows: by one director elected by residents when the first residential phase is opened, and by a second upon the project's completion. 2) Concern: By eliminating the existing provisions of the current RIOC law governing state indemnification for liability over and above that covered by RIOC's insurance policies, S.5893 would leave the corporation and its officers without the protection afforded all other state public benefit corporations in the event of a catastrophe resulting in damage or liability that might otherwise bankrupt the Island. Unlikely as such an occurrence might be, without the protection afforded by state indemnification, RIOC (i.e. Island residents) would be on the line for claims that exceed the amount covered by conventional policies. Since even the governor's staff concede that there is virtually no foreseeable added risk to the state in providing traditional indemnification, this coverage should be retained in the bill.
State indemnification (Sec. 8. a.1.) is reinserted in order to protect the corporation, and pursuant to Section 17 of the Public Officers Law its officers, directors and employees from and against any and all liability, claim, loss, damage suit or judgement including any and all costs and expenses in carrying out their duties in the management and operation of the Island. 3) Concern: There were three key substantive issues that were not addressed in S.5893 that could potentially be obstacles to a successful transition to self-governance of the Island by the residents and could pose a recipe for disaster: a) The bill contains no mechanism for the new resident controlled entity to acquire comprehensive knowledge of RIOC's current financial condition and a complete assessment of the Island's facilities and overall physical condition before taking over control and responsibility; b) The bill confers no authority to borrow money or issue bonds to raise funds for current and/or future capital projects; c) The bill has no provision committing the state to assume either the responsibility for repairing or reimbursing the new entity for the costs of correcting structural defects of which RIOC had knowledge/or of which it could have reasonably been expected to have knowledge (such as the repairs needed for the Good Shepherd Chapel, Seawall, Blackwell House, Motorgate, and Tramway). Nor is there any way to know how much such repairs might cost; and. d) Nothing in the bill locks in the commitment Senator Mendez received from Governor Pataki to pay for repairs exceeding $500,000. The following amendments are offered to address these concerns.
Pursuant to this new section, within 90 days of its election the new board through a request for proposals will 1) contract for a comprehensive fiscal audit of the corporation for the three prior years and 2) contract for a full independent engineering study of the Island's infrastructure.
Pursuant to this new section, within 60 days of the effective date of the legislation, and prior to the transfer to the new entity, the director of the budget shall provide written certification that the corporation is fiscally sound and has sufficient revenues to meet current and future obligations. Also, the DHCR commissioner shall provide written certification that the physical condition of the Island is sound and that the infrastructure and improvements for which RIOC is responsible are also sound and free of defects.
My amendments change the dates for the submission of RIOC's proposed budget to the legislature and the director of the budget back to the date of September 15 that is now in the current law. This allows time for the governor to review and provide in his budget for the upcoming state fiscal year appropriations for the Island's capital needs and operations which are identified either in the audits that will now be required pursuant to section 17 and to honor his commitment to Senator Mendez to cover the cost of needed capital projects approved by the board in a fiscal year which in the aggregate exceed $500,000. The final two amendments reinsert sections of the current RIOC law which I believe were inadvertently removed in S.5893. These provisions deal with how RIOC carries on its business and deals with its employees.
This section authorizes DHCR upon RIOC's request to:
Section 8.b.2. requires that employees of the corporation receive credit for all applicable service under the retirement and social security law. After your review of these proposed revisions, would you please forward me your comments so that we can then discuss where we need to go to advance our common goal of self-governance for the residents of Roosevelt Island. Best wishes to all of you for the Holiday Season and for a healthy, happy and prosperous New Year.
|
| |||||||||||||