Members of the West Harlem Local Development Corporation said that the state attorney general has launched an investigation into the organization—but at least one politician is defending the LDC’s procedures.
The development corporation, which is responsible for doling out $76 million of Columbia’s money for housing, schools, and job training in West Harlem, has distributed only $300,000 of the $3.55 million that the University has already given it and has yet to hold public meetings or find permanent office space. Several politicians and community activists, including Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, have criticized the LDC over the last two weeks, with some calling for legal action against the organization.
But City Council member Robert Jackson, who has a representative that sits on the LDC board, defended the organization, saying that it was unrealistic to demand transparency from the LDC because it is not yet up and running.
“When they have their setup, hopefully it will be as transparent as they expect,” he said.
Last week, Stringer issued a press release condemning the LDC for its lack of transparency and expressing disappointment that the LDC had allocated $300,000 to a city summer youth employment program without a formal application process.
“It is essential that the LDC devote itself fully to the transition process, and halt any further disbursement of funds,” Stringer said.
Jackson said that these funds were badly needed in West Harlem because of budget cuts for that employment program.
“The LDC stepped up and spent $300,000 for 200 West Harlem youth,” Jackson said. “You don’t need a rocket scientist to tell you that it’s a very good decision.”
According to LDC member Pat Jones, State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s investigation is an “information inquiry,” meaning that Schneiderman’s office has requested records from the LDC. Other local politicians had varied responses to the investigation, but said they supported the attorney general’s right to investigate.
Congressman Charles Rangel said that he had not heard that the attorney general had issued a subpoena but saw nothing wrong with his decision to investigate.
“I’ll be anxiously awaiting any investigation that is going to be taking place,” Rangel said. “I welcome it.”
Congressional candidate and SIPA graduate Vince Morgan, who has been outspoken against the LDC in recent weeks, said he was pleased with the attorney general’s move.
“I’m glad that the attorney general sees the importance of this issue and has at least opened the door,” Morgan, who is running for Rangel’s congressional seat in 2012, said.
“We’re not asking for anything complex. They should have the documentation available,” he said.
Morgan said that though he could not speculate on the legal details of the subpoena, he is working independently of the attorney general’s investigation to file an information request about the LDC under the Freedom of Information Act.
“We can’t sit on our hands to wait for an organization to get their act together after five years,” Morgan said. “We need to demand accountability.”
Neither LDC President Donald Notice nor the attorney general’s office responded to requests for comment. In an interview with Spectator in April, Notice had said that the LDC was transitioning to a different legal entity which would allow it to distribute funds and that he expected the office and website to be fully functional by the end of this year.
Correction: A previous version of this article's headline inaccurately suggested that Jackson defended the LDC's inactivity. His support more directly pertains to the LDC's current procedures for distributing money.
COMMENTS
Comments will be moderated in accordance with our comment policy