[Referendum Version being considered:]

I favor democracy
I urge immediate passage of legislation that grants residents of Roosevelt Island the right to elect a majority of the RIOC Board of Directors, replacing the current system in which the entire Board is composed of non-elected members appointed by the Governor.

Professional Management
I understand that the new Board will select, hire, and direct professional management to run Roosevelt Island.

Financial Responsibility
I understand that the State has provided no funds to Roosevelt Island for four years, and that passage of such legislation may or may not change the Island's financial condition.

Audrey Berman
I also think I have an understanding of the financial responsibility part of this... The financial responsibility part is not just about the capital and operating budgets. It's also about the State indemnification.

Ken Diebner
There is a strong argument for going back to the City, but right now we should send a strong message to our political parties that mismanagement, corruption, graft, and did I say mismanagement? Let me say it again -- mismanagement -- that the Island has deteriorated in the past 25 years has got to stop. The only way it's going to stop is if we elect our Board and I am very much in favor of the referendum, as written.

Joyce Mincheff
This question of financial responsibility keeps coming up. A community-controlled RIOC can ask the Governor for money. A Governor-controlled RIOC, for the last 3.5 years, has refused to ask the Governor for money. They've used the money that we all pay in rents – which is double-taxation for Island services, because we all pay State taxes and City taxes. If we pay City taxes we're entitled to have them come out here and pave the road. We shouldn't have to pay for that again. We have the right to have the City come out here and lay a new sidewalk, but they don't do that – RIOC does it, and they do it with money that they collect from our rent...
    We're paying for services twice. We're paying them through our tax money and not getting any return on it, and... people we don't elect [make the decisions]... Now keep in mind, if you were in the City you elect these people that make decisions about who paves your sidewalks and streets... You could have a vote in who our City officials are. Your City officials don't pave your streets. They don't pave your sidewalks. RIOC does.
    You have a right to elect the people that make the decisions in this local community about what they do with your money. The State of New York treats this community like it's their own private little fiefdom. We are not a colony. They're using our money to operate Roosevelt Island. We are entitled for these people to ask the Governor for some tax dollars. The Governor's appointees are not going to ask for it. So the most fiscally- responsible thing that we can do is to have a democratically- elected RIOC.
    The City of New York is not going to fight the State of New York to wrest control away from the State. They have too much at stake to go into battle with the State in order to do away with a 99-year lease for this property. To think that they're going to do that is just totally unrealistic. The State of New York has a lease for 99 years. And the City of New York has to do business with the State of New York, every day of their lives. And if you think they're going to do battle with the State of New York that's going to influence the other money they get from the State in order to wrest control over a community that now has humongous fiscal problems, they're not going to do it.
   The only way you can get your fiscal problems resolved is for the community to elect the Board, for the Board that's elected to ask the State to produce that money that Olga Mendez guaranteed that the Governor would produce.

Byron Gaspard
... Well, I think the language is simple enough... with the changes that you've made.
    I believe we have to have the referendum on the ballot. I believe that we need to really find out exactly what the community's outlook and what the community support is for this referendum and for democracy. In terms of the conversations I've had with people on the Island, a lot of people believe that the system that we have now simply is not working on behalf of Roosevelt Island. You know, you have a group of people that sit on the [RIOC] Board whose interest is not for the benefit of Roosevelt Island. It's really for the benefit of themselves. You have political appointees that are put by the Governor who are not put here for the benefit of Roosevelt Island. And you have the Governor himself who hasn't worked for the benefit of Roosevelt Island. We haven't received not one nickel, not one dime, in terms of dealing with the enormous debts we have here. That's not going to change until we change the system. We're got to get a question on the ballot to see exactly how the community feels about it...

Walter Hill
I'm on RIRA. I'm 76 years old going on 77. Democratic... I have never encountered it in my 76 years of life in the United States. This is superficial. The Maple Tree Group, as far as I'm concerned, is an ad hoc committee. I belong to RIRA. I don't want nothin' to do with it. That's it.

Joan Christianson
I think that we do need to hear what the citizens of this Island have to say. I have a problem with the first part saying, "I favor democracy," and I have a problem with the fiscal responsibility part of it. I realize there's a tremendous amount of money that's needed right now to put this Island in shape. Olga Mendez says that the Governor has agreed to make the state responsible for anything over $500,000. RIOC, be it the RIOC that's sitting there now or be it the RIOC that we elect, just doesn't have $500,000. From what the fiscal reports showed, they had $19,000 this year and they project $35,000 for next year. I have a real problem with letting the State of New York off the hook. Even though they haven't done anything in almost four years and haven't given us any money in almost 4.5 years, because of their lease with the City they are ultimately responsible for the repairs and the work that is needed to be done on this Island, and maybe it's foolish of me [but] I believe that they will have to pay for it and they will have to do it, and i don't believe we should take it upon ourselves to be responsible for the first $500,000 work that... has to be done.
    So I think that I do favor some kind of a referendum, but I think that we have to continue to make the state fiscally responsible for all of it, and i think plain & simply... I do believe that this version [that Karen Stewart brought in] is simple, straightforward, that I could deal with... [quoting]: 'I favor fiscal responsibility. I believe that we should not release the state of NY from its fiscal responsibility for RI. I believe that all effort should be directed toward increasing membership on the RIOC board to a majority of locally-elected members.'
    And I respect all the work that Maple Tree Group has done, I was out there when we were screaming for democracy, I rant and rave at RIOC Board meetings, at Public Safety meetings, so yes, I want changes, but I don't want changes that are going to put any resident on this Island in jeopardy. And I really do fear for that, if we take total control over this Island.
    I think that what we should be pushing for at this time is to have the majority of members of the RIOC Board elected by us. And that perhaps is the first step, and then, perhaps, another step is taken. But I've read as much as I can understand of the bill as it stands now, and I'm sorry, it really scares me. I believe that one section can be interpreted as giving away the GDP [General Development Plan]... , as them not... one section the way i read it releases you know compliance with the GDP. And the fiscal responsibility by the State of New York, that's another thing that scares me. So, you know, I would have a problem with this kind of referendum on the ballot.

Patrick Stewart
I'm against any kind of a referendum, to tell you the truth, because it's too complex. We are asking people to understand what we understand over many years here in conference, and so on.
    Further than that, the "I Favor Democracy" line is what I would call a leading statement. In other words, I see that, I check it off, which means therefore everything that follows is democracy, and that is not what is here.
    I also agree that a citizen-controlled Board of Directors is probably the way to go, and I believe Pete Grannis and Olga Mendez believed that in 1986...
    The reality of the fiscal situation of RI is really quite simple, and it is disastrous, and it is as follows: There are roughly $200 million in bonds that need to be paid off by UDC [Urban Development Corporation] or Empire State Development [Corporation], to pay off the bond debt. There's $50 million worth of infrastructure repairs that need to be made on the Island because of the neglect of the past five years. Oh, by the way, it's four and a half years that no funds have been provided, which again, is 4.5 years of neglect which have caused us $50 million worth of damage. So we've got $200 million to the bondholders, $50 million worth of infrastructure, and $20K in the bank. The arithmetic doesn't make any sense.
    And finally, to the point of RIOC's not doing anything one of the reasons I, and this is no great shakes, but RIOC is doing something. That's why I asked you all to come to the [RIOC Board] meeting tomorrow. There are two resolutions here where RIOC is asking the State for money at the recommendation of the Board of Directors, and that will be discussed tomorrow and it will be passed. So those two are here if you would like to look at them or go to the meeting tomorrow.
    So, to give the devil his due, it's not that the RIOC Board itself has not asked for money, they are. It's a drop in the bucket.
    If I were to become Rob Ryan tomorrow, and I wouldn't want that job for ten times the money he makes, because... he has all the problems and none of the solutions. He doesn't have the money to make this Island run. It's as simple as that.
    Now, as far as holding the State responsible, absolutely, I do believe we should hold the State responsible for this. There are a variety of ways to do that, and the Board is investigating a variety of ways to do that. One is to return to the City of New York. There is active involvement by the Board and by our politicians... we're meeting with our politicians and so on, to discuss the matter. So I personally believe and I honestly believe that the solutions are being worked on they are reasonable and viable solutions, as indicated admittedly in a token form, as indicated here about what the intent of the Board and RIOC is, and therefore I would have to go back to, number one, no referendum at all because it's confusing and, number two, if we were to accede to the wisdom of Pete Grannis and Olga Mendez 14 years ago, we would be much better off.

Judy Berdy
Since it takes 20 of us, and none of us can interpret this resolution, simplified, super-simplified, or pulverized or mashed or whatever, I don't think any member of the community, the few hundred who are going to give a damn, if we get that many, who care, are going to vote for this because they don't know what it is. It was hard enough last time when we had a one-line resolution, let along this. And I think it's a sorry state of the American electorate, but people don't understand these resolutions...
    They can be misrepresented, misinterpreted, they can be reinterpreted, the can be... all kinds of things can be used in later years, saying people meant this. This is an election for officers. There's an officer who wants this, a person wanting this, a person who has other opinions. They are running for office. You vote for the person, the officers, the president, the vice president of this organization who support what you want, and I don't think that we should ask the people to do this. Aside from our...
    First, I would say, 'I want to go back to the City of New York, yes or no,' but when we get into this 'majority of residents,' and 'Islanders,' and 'Albany,' you're going to come up with eight more pages of baloney to get more directors that are Islanders. It is not worth our financial future and what we are going to go through that will tear the community apart over this. I want the State of New York held, its little hot feet, held to the fiscal fire until we can get out from under this lease, and I'm sure, between you [Patrick Stewart] and Leo and the other Directors, there are a lot of people working to void this lease and go back to the City, because I just don't think risking misinterpretation all over again is worth it to this community. We have people running on slates. The people will vote for the person for President and Vice President who they feel will interpret their desires. Thank you.

Kitty Berman
I don't think this legislation will pass, but since I believe in democracy I believe you have the right to have the referendum, OK. I also would favor the G/M suggestion of many years ago that has been referred to over and over again over the years that there would be an augmentation of the present RIOC Board where people from the community replace the foreign members on the Board, and that can be done without a revolution. And the third thing is I favor the eventual return of Roosevelt Island to the City for many of the reasons that Joyce mentioned – that we already pay taxes, that we get nothing back. End of story.

Matthew Katz
I'll try to parse this down a little bit. "I favor democracy." Well, I do favor democracy but it is a little, well, strong, and I'm not wedded to it. If people object to that, I see no problem with changing it.
    I think the important things on these three points are: We want to elect RIOC, and we want them to hire professional management.
    The third issue on there about the financial responsibility was really trying to respond to the kinds of things that Audrey brought up, because people are concerned that the financial status of this Island will change if there's an elected rather than an appointed Board. We simply wanted to address the question that whether it is this RIOC or a RIOC2, it is still a New York State public benefit corporation under the control of the State and the responsibility of the State. That doesn't change. If the State wants to allocate money, subsidies to this Island, it can do so under a RIOC1 or a RIOC2 Board. There's nothing to prevent it.
    What does change is that the political status of the Island is no longer there. This is no longer a Board appointed by a Republican Governor. It's just a Board. And so the strictures against giving money to someone of a different party no longer are there. If Pete Grannis wants to give us $600,000 there is a RIOC Board that is prepared to accept it. That's not the case right now. So what we are doing is not changing anything about whether we can accept money from the State. We still can.
    Also, I would bring to your attention this whole question of the deductible. The deductible as it exists now in the Assembly bill is $250,000. As it exists in the Senate bill it is $500,000. The current responsibility of this RIOC for this Island is $6 million for the seawall repairs, $40 million or $50 million, depending on when you ask, for the infrastructure of the entire Island, $4.5 million to connect the existing infrastructure to phase one of Southtown. The current RIOC is responsible for the whole kit and caboodle, because there's no one else to pick up those costs. What the purpose of this deducible is, is to limit the liability of Roosevelt Island. Now sure, we found out that the surpluses of this Island are considerably less than RIOC had been telling us over the years, but what this legislation will offer us is an opportunity to limit an existing liability, because one way or another, somebody's got to fix this Island. Currently, RIOC is responsible for everything and they can't pay. With the new RIOC the responsibility is limited dramatically with new opportunities to get money from a variety of sources.
    Now, I'd like to respond to the "I favor fiscal responsibility" portion of the potential for the referendum. I'm not sure I understand exactly but it seems to me there are two separate issues being discussed here. One is the return to full governance by the City of New York, and sooner or later that's going to happen, but the way things are standing now, we're all going to be dead by the time that happens. The problem is, do we want to go back to the City in our lifetimes. And I think that's worth addressing. I don't know what kind of work has been done on this by RIOC or by anyone else. I don't know if there's anybody in City government who's willing to listen to this kind of question, or what they have to say about it, because, after all, this government in the City is limited by term limitations. We're going to be dealing with a completely different government within a short period of time, and it looks like the mayor's name is not going to be Giuliani, it's going to be a Democrat. So it's a whole new ball of wax.
    Also, I'm not sure why the City would want to take back a half-developed Island with millions of infrastructure costs. If they bide their time and wait 66 years, they get a completely developed Island back as a cash cow. So I'm not sure why the City would consider taking us back under our present situation. We all know the difficulties of development that face us at present.
    Also, I wonder why we would want this to happen. My understanding over the past year is that this RIRA Common Council has been fighting tooth and nail to protect the General Development Plan. I've read emails that have said that this is our primary function. Well, should we go back to the City, the first thing that goes is the master lease. Well, what goes with the master lease is the General Development Plan. It's gone. Now, maybe it will be replaced by something -- some kind of zoning -- perhaps a community board of our own, but none of this issues have been brought out, and before something goes on a referendum, we should have an idea of what kind of projections we can expect from the City. I think that's simply responsible before we ask the question to the community about going back to the City. What kind of projections do we get in lieu of a General Development Plan that will die with the lease? That concerns me.
    Regarding the second paragraph here, "I believe that self-governance efforts should be directed solely to increasing RIOC Board membership to a majority of local Board members, I would address your attention to the vote of our locally- appointed directors at the June meeting of RIOC. Four of the nine members of that RIOC Board are residents of this Island. Yet, because they are appointed and not elected, we found that there was not a single vote against the minischool condo conversion. And if we get a RIOC Board that is composed entirely of residents but they're still appointed by one man, the Governor of the State, I think we can expect more of the same.
    An elected Board is the power of this Board. An appointed Board, regardless of who is sitting on it, whether non- residents or residents, will never have the best interests of this community at heart.
    This is a country in which there are three levels of government, federal, state, local. Each of those levels of government is elected by the people they serve. And I think that is essential to any kind of government here on Roosevelt Island.

Linda Heimer
Democracy is not perfect. There will be mistakes. However, we will have the power to control it by our votes. And that is what's so important. As Matthew said, we have federal, State, and local government. But we have no local government. I don't care what you say about Pete, and Gifford, and Olga, all those wonderful people who do whatever they can to help us, they can't do enough under this present system. Therefore, we need local control and we ain't got it. Therefore...

[Result:
6 against, 14 for, 2 abstain (Joyce Mincheff's count)
7 against, 13 for, 2 abstain (Joan Christianson's count)]

[Version now moved (headings and last provision removed):]

I urge immediate passage of legislation that grants residents of Roosevelt Island the right to elect a majority of the RIOC Board of Directors, replacing the current system in which the entire Board is composed of non-elected members appointed by the Governor.

I understand that the new Board will select, hire, and direct professional management to run Roosevelt Island.

Patrick Stewart
It is very important that we understand what's going on here and I think that as Matthew said the new RIOC board would be able to do all of these wonderful things.
    The Q is why would the new RIOC board be able to do any more than the old RIOC board would because the new RIOC board would not have any more money than the new RIOC board would. Understand that the 8.5 million dollars gross revenue that comes to RIOC is used to run the Island, to maintain the Island, not to fix the infrastructure, not to pay for legal bills, not to pay for anything other than hopefully keeping the street the way it is. The projected new Board is assuming all the obligations on behalf of the community – all 8,500, all of the obligations that the present Board has. The present Board has well in excess of 300 million dollars in obligations. The Q there is where is this new board gonna get the money when the old board can't get the money? Is Pete Grannis gonna get us $500,000? That's not $300 million? If Gifford Miller gonna get us some trees? that is not going to do it. This is fiscal irresponsibility. It is financial suicide to do these things. The fact of the matter is that no matter how you look at it, now matter how you say it, the numbers don't add to a fiscal responsible policy for the Island.
    If all of us decide that we're going to go out and buy Entenmann's Bakeries, Entenmann's Bakeries is in serious debt, no problem because we would have the money to bring Entenmann's Bakeries back. The organization does not have the money to do anything with regard to that.
    Please understand that if you've got $40 or $50 million of infrastructure debt, you've got $200 million in bonds to be paid off, you've got capital spending that hasn't been done for lo these many years, and you have $20,000 in the bank to do it with. Now that doesn't take a rocket accountant to figure that out. The money is not there. Is PG going to get us the money? No, because he can't get us the money. Is Gifford Miller going to get us the money? No, because he can't get us the money. Gifford Miller might be susceptible to a proposition that the community go back to the City. I am saying and I am saying this on my own behalf, because I've lived here and my neighbors have lived there that whoever these new RIOC Board members are, the minute they walk in the door, at RIOC, you can hire all the management in the world, you can have every one of the people in RIOC being an expert in whatever it is, the money isn't there.
    You can't operate without money. There is no program go get money. That's it, pure and simple. So, do we want to take on that obligation on behalf of our neighbors to say, 'we're going to go out and get some neighbors here, and they will take care of it.' They will not take care of it because 1, they can't borrow money without the state, 2, they can't float bonds without the state, 3, they can't tax because it's illegal to do that. So where is this money going to come from? It isn't. It isn't there and it will not be there. That's simple.

Joan Christianson
Within the last several months I started doing more reading on this. One of the things I read was the September 1982 strategies for self-governance. They were looking for a lot of what we were looking for right now. They got screwed at the last minutes. And that's show we ended up with the RIOC we have now. One of the things that I fear, and I guess it's my distrust for government officials is that we're putting our faith in Pete and Olga getting a bill passed that will benefit us. And give us some control and hopefully and not sink us in some way shape or form, and what can happen is that at the last minute the Governor, or some other politician can throw something in there that can drastically change everything that you guys have worked so hard for int he last couple of years. Is that a chance that everybody is willing to take? I don't know. I guess that's something that each of us has to decide – whether we're willing to take that kind of a chance. I fear getting screwed as they did before.

Ron Vass
In 1982 I was very deeply involved. The way we got screwed, Joan, was the way we're going to get screwed now. We had the opportunity to have a Board but we surrendered the privilege of voting for those people on the Board by giving it to the Governor to do just what he's doing now. We have to take control. We didn't take control. We were there and we lost it.

Byron Gaspard
The fact of the matter is we keep talking about what's going to happen... We being screwed big-time now. We have a RIOC that has not accepted any money. We need to take control of our own destiny. Why allow someone else to do it for us? That's exactly what's happening with the RIOC that we have in place now.

Matthew Katz
I have to agree with Joan. What happened in 1984 screwed the Island and it seems to me that preserving that screwing is not in our best interests. If this bill is passed, whatever this deductible happens to be, what we will have is a capital budget guaranteed by law over and above whatever the deductible is. The State will be obliged to cover whatever the capital expenses are?

Patrick Stewart
For how long?

Matthew Katz
I would urge you that what this referendum says is not the bill. The bill is not mentioned in the referendum. Two years ago we talked about the Grannis bill. Now we are simply talking about a philosophical hope for representative government on this Island. That's all these two sentences say. So the time for arguing about the bill is when Patrick and I get a chance to debate prior to the elections on November 7. What we are doing now is simply creating a hope and a guarantee on this Island that we are looking to preserve electoral rights on the Island. Period.

Linda Heimer
And what this is about is letting the people decide. Patrick is saying we're deciding for 8,500 people. No. They're deciding for themselves. [OBSC]... Pete and Olga to work it out. I think that the mistake that Pete made several years ago was that at the last minute they decided [OBSC] and we go ahead with it. I think he wouldn't make that mistake today. I think he would be very careful today. I think he is building a lot of safeguards into this. But again we are not voting for particular legislation. And that's just to put it on the ballot. We're not going to decided. We're just giving the residents the chance to decide.

Patrick Stewart
We have to give the residents a knowledgeable choice.

Linda Heimer
And we will educate them. You will, in your campaign. Matthew will, in his campaign. That's what democracy is about. And if they don't understand it by the time they get to the election machines that's their problem, not ours. Because that's what happens in a democracy. Let's take a vote.

[Vote on the question]

[Vote recorded as 13 Yes, 8 No]