When did Christine Quinn sell out to real estate developers ?

Real Estates Donations To Christine Quinn Escalated in 2004

From Chapter 8 of "Roots of Betrayal : The Ethics of Christine Quinn," available now on Scribd :

The unmistakable spike in real estate donations to Christine’s political campaign as early as the 2005 election cycle meant that real estate interests and lobbyists were intending to compromise Christine’s independence on real estate issues. The sizeable donations from Gary Barnett, Douglas Durst, George Arzt, James Capalino, and some of the donations from the Meilman family dated back to 2004, an early sign that the fix may have already been in on the speakership from a year prior to the 2005 election. It’s not uncommon for real estate interests to begin making heavy campaign donations over a year in advance to their approved political candidates. The sizeable donations to Ms. Katz’s campaign account also reflected her own contention for the speakership. Christine’s campaign for the speakership began early, as measured by the flood of real estate donations, and, Christine followed Speaker Miller’s pattern of reaching out to the county bosses for their support. This county boss strategy was confirmed by Brooklyn councilmember Bill de Blasio, as told to New York magazine. “She understood, better than I did, that a lot of this ball game revolved around the county Democratic leaders,” he said, adding, “She did a better job in developing those relationships, presenting a personality they were comfortable with, finding out how not to be threatening to them.” In 2002, the Queens County Democratic boss, Tom Manton, had negotiated from Speaker Miller the City Council Land Use committee chair appointment for one of his delegation’s members, Melinda Katz, in whom the real estate industry had already invested multiple and sizeable campaign donations. In the run up to the 2005 campaign season, Mr. Manton was interested in maintaining the status quo for his own power base, as well as for real estate interests, who did not want to take a loss on the money that they had spent to finance Ms. Katz’s appointment to the Land Use committee. Upon Christine’s assumption of the speakership, Ms. Katz kept her leadership post on Land Use, and David Weprin, another member of the Queens City Council delegation, kept his appointment as chair of the powerful Finance committee. He, too, was well-financed by real estate interests and lobbyists. The permanent establishment that spends so heavily on reelecting approved incumbents does not like insurgents of any kind.

Read more on Scribd : "Roots of Betrayal : The Ethics of Christine Quinn"

Bloomberg CityTime Ethics Investigation

If the U.S. Attorney General won't appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the CityTime scandal, can we ask Public Advocate Bill De Blasio to launch an independent ethics investigation into the Bloomberg-Quinn administration ?

Michael Bloomberg, our control-queen mayor who is famous for fighting for more and more mayoral control over everything, including public education, is spinning the tall tale that he was never in control over the fraud being committed during the cost over-runs during the CityTime payroll system scandal.

"The fraud-riddled CityTime payroll system is being transferred to the city's control in the wake of indictments, guilty pleas and the public demand by Mayor Bloomberg that he wants $600 million back from the company in charge of the project.

"Rather than rely on contractors caught up in the corruption scandal to oversee the system, the city will assemble a team of roughly 70 technicians under its own control -- including many who worked for the companies now under investigation," reported The New York Post.

Just a week ago, Mayor Bloomberg was defending the hundred million dollars in cost over-runs in the CityTime project. (As if mayoral control hadn't yet been exposed to be a joke (take, for example, the Cathie Black appointment) Mayor Bloomberg is now trying to extend mayoral control from public education to the juvenile justice system.) And if that wasn't enough, now that Mayor Bloomberg claims that ''control'' over CityTime is being transferred to City Hall, one wonders who is the man behind the curtain, who is pulling all the levers, flipping all the switches, and turning all the dials ? Meanwhile, to no one's surprise, now that the CityTime milking project has gone bust, the Bloomberg administration is now on the prowl for another "new" payroll system.

"Buried in the agency's resolution was the surprising announcement that, come January, the city will seek new proposals for computerized payroll management," The Post report added.

During these three terms of Bloomberg mayoral control, he and Deputy Mayor Christine Quinn have complete and total control over the city budget, including approving appropriations of most, if not all, of the cost over-runs on the CityTime project. Will Mr. de Blasio do the right thing -- and launch an independent ethics investigation ? For more coverage, please visit the CityTime cover-up reporting by True News From Change. For more coverage, please visit the CityTime cover-up reporting by True News From Change.

Charter revision, barter commission

Copied entirely from The New York Times :

Flashback to October 2008 : Groups See Ethics Violation In Mayor's Pledge to Lauder

By MICHAEL BARBARO
Published: October 10, 2008

Two civic groups said on Thursday that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg violated the city's ethics laws when he pledged to put Ronald S. Lauder on a charter revision commission in exchange for his support for the mayor's third-term effort.

The groups, the New York Public Interest Research Group and Common Cause, made the charge in a complaint filed with the city's Conflicts of Interest Board.

Mr. Lauder, who underwrote the campaign in 1993 to create the city's two-term limit for elected officials, had posed a serious threat to Mr. Bloomberg's plans to legislatively allow a third term.

Mr. Lauder had vowed to oppose the mayor's plan to make a three-term limit permanent, until Wednesday, when Mr. Bloomberg promised to appoint him to a charter revision commission that could return the law to its original limit of two terms.

The civic groups contend that the deal violates a provision of the City Charter, which says that a mayor cannot ''use or attempt to use his or her position as a public servant to obtain any financial gain, contract, license, privilege or other private or personal advantage, direct or indirect, for the public servant.''

In their complaint, the groups said that ''we believe that Mayor Bloomberg has used his position in a prohibited manner to obtain personal advantage in a quid pro quo deal with Ronald Lauder.''

Mr. Lauder's support, they said, represents a ''a great gain, given Mr. Lauder's track record of spending millions to defend the current two-term limit.''

Jason Post, a spokesman for the mayor, said there was no conflict of interest. ''This is purely a publicity stunt by people who are distorting the intent of the conflicts law because they disagree with the mayor on a matter of public policy.'' He added: ''It's the first of what will likely be many headline-seeking activities to prevent the City Council from exercising its authority to change a local law.''

Gene Russianoff, a senior lawyer for the New York Public Interest Research Group, said that ''more and more, the mayor looks like just another politician desperate to do anything to save his government job.''

Two members of the City Council filed a separate complaint on Thursday with the Conflicts of Interest Board. The members, Bill de Blasio and Letitia James, contend that extending term limits would be self-dealing, since it would allow legislators to seek a third term in office.

Like the civic groups, the council members cited a city law that prohibits elected officials from using their positions for ''private or personal advantage.''