3.         Petitioners have chosen to invoke ' 1109 in this case because it is a unique mechanism for lifting the veil of secrecy that surrounds intricate political dealings regarding discretionary allocations of public funds.  A summary inquiry should hold the City Council, the City Council Speaker and other government officials accountable for their involvement in the Practice and bring to light the facts surrounding this practice and necessary to assess the effectiveness of proposed reforms.

4.         The systemic and ongoing Practice of making appropriations to fictitious entities has created precisely the kind of breach in the public trust ' 1109 was intended to address.  Only New York City Charter ' 1109 provides the full public record that is needed, and can provide it now, when public confidence in the integrity of New York City Government is most shaken.

PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

5.         Petitioner Jim Riches is a is a citizen and tax-payer of New York City residing in the borough of Brooklyn.

6.         Petitioner  Jonathan Weiss is a citizen and a tax payer of New York City residing in the borough of Manhattan.

7.         Petitioner Carmen Colon is a citizen and a tax-payer of New York City residing in the borough of Brooklyn. 

8.         Petitioner Philip DiPaolo is a citizen and a tax-payer of New York City residing in the borough of Brooklyn. 

9.         Petitioner Marque Claxton is a citizen and a tax payer of New York City and a tax-payer residing in the borough of Queens. 

10.       Petitioner Peter Killen is a citizen of New York City residing in the borough of Staten Island.

11.       Petitioner Emmanuel Gonzalez, Jr is a citizen of New York City residing in the borough of Staten Island.

12.       Petitioner Rafael Martinez Alequin is a citizen of New York City residing in the borough of Bronx.

13.       Respondent the New York City Council is the legislature of New York City, authorized under New York City Charter ' 247 to recommend changes to the New York City preliminary budget, under ' 243 to submit an estimate of its needs for inclusion in the executive budget without modification, and by ' 254 to amend and adopt the New York City executive budget.

14.       Respondent Christine Quinn is a member of the New York City Council and an officer and employee of New York City, and serves as Speaker of the New York City Council, from which position she controls the proceedings of the City Council, and effectively controls the content of resolutions through which the body, by its vote of approval, expresses its recommendations and make its amendments in the New York City budget process.

15.       This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to New York City Charter ' 1109.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~download full petition here~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

45.       Petitioners respectfully urge the court to convene such an inquiry in order to seek answers to the following questions, among others:

$          When did the practice of making appropriations to fictitious organizations begin?

 

$          Why was the Practice begun?

 

$          Who was involved in the decision to make appropriations to fictitious

organizations?

 

$          Who came up with the names of the fictitious organizations?

 

$          What organizations were funded out of the funds not spent by the fictitious organizations?

 

$          Who identified the unspent funds available for re-allocation?

 

$          How was it decided which organizations would be funded, and who made the decision?

 

$          Did the persons devising the budget modification know that the unspent funds had been appropriated to fictitious organizations?

 

$          Were other members of the City Council beyond the Speaker aware that the organizations receiving the original appropriations were fictitious?

 

$          What, if anything, did Mayor Bloomberg or the Mayor=s office of Management and Budget know about the Practice?

 

$          In the Mayor=s review of the budget, what inquiry was made into the nature of the fictitious organizations?

 

$          What, if anything, did the Comptroller or his office know about the Practice?

 

$          What inquiry was made by the Comptroller into the allocations to fictitious entities?

46.       The witnesses who should be examined include:

$          City Council Speaker Christine Quinn

 

$          Former City Council Speaker Gifford Miller

 

$          Former City Council Speaker Peter Vallone, Sr.

 

$          Former City Council finance director Michael Koegh

 

$          Former City Council deputy finance director Staci Emanuel

 

$          Current Council Speaker chief of staff Charles Meara

 

$          Special Counsel to the Speaker Wayne Kwadler

 

$          Mayor Michael Bloomberg

 

$          Former Mayor Rudolph Giulliani

 

$          New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson

 

$          Former Comptroller Allan Hevesi

47.       The fact that other investigations related to this matter may be ongoing does not detract from the need for the creation of a public record under Charter ' 1109.  Petitioners are aware that the matter has been referred to the United States Attorney for the Southern District and the New York City Department of Investigation.  Such referrals, however, do not ensure that the full facts regarding the City Council Practice of making appropriations to fictitious organizations will come to public light.  Facts discovered in the office of the United States Attorney are not made public when there is no criminal indictment or more broadly than the facts necessary for such indictment.  Similarly, findings of the New York City Department of Investigations that do not result in Formal Disciplinary Proceedings are not reported to the public.  In the event of Informal Proceedings, the record or result of the DOI=s investigation is expunged.

48.       No prior application has been made by Petitioners for the relief requested herein.

Relief Requested

 

WHEREFORE, this Court should grant Petitioners= application by

a.         convening a summary judicial inquiry under City Charter ' 1109 into the practice of appropriations to fictitious organizations, the exercise of influence in their unchecked re-allocation, and all who have participated, or colluded in, or condoned the Practice.

b.         considering a supplemental list of questions within the scope of that provided in & 44, above, and a supplemental list of relevant witnesses as Petitioners shall provide within one week of the Court=s grant of this application, and approving such questions and witnesses as the court finds proper,

c.         ordering all such approved witnesses to appear before it,

d.         hearing testimony in response to the questioning of attorneys for the Petitioners and attorneys for the Respondents,

e.         causing such testimony to be reduced to a written record,

f.          filing such written record with the New York County Clerk,

g.         awarding Petitioners their costs of this proceeding, including reasonable attorneys= fees, and

h.         granting to Petitioners such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Dated:             New York, New York

May 3, 2008

 

 

_____________________________

NORMAN SIEGEL

260 Madison Avenue

New York, NY 10016

(212) 532-7586

 

and

 

McLAUGHLIN & STERN, LLP

 

 

 

By ___________________________

STEVEN J. HYMAN

260 Madison Avenue

New York, NY 10016

(212) 448-1100

 

and

 

 

 

_______________________________

PHILIP VAN BUREN

153 West 93^rd Street

New York, New York 10025

(646) 387-8999

 

Attorneys for Petitioners