The city council will discuss a proposed contract to give the Newburgh IDA funding on Thursday night.
There are two overlapping city meetings this Thursday evening, February 9th. Beginning at 6 p.m. is the City Council Work Session; its agenda can be downloaded from the city’s site here, and the meeting will take place on the third floor of City Hall. Meanwhile, the Newburgh Industrial Development Agency will have its Governance Committee meet at 6:45 p.m. followed by the monthly full board meeting at 7 p.m., agenda here; those meetings will be in the Law Library on the second floor of City Hall.
The next two regular council meetings have changed dates:
The Feb. 13 City Council meeting will be held on Tuesday, Feb. 14 at 7 p.m.
The Feb. 27 City Council meeting will be on Tuesday, Feb. 28 at 7 p.m.
City-IDA contract: waste of money?
Up for discussion at the City Council Work Session Thursday night, and potentially up for a vote on the council’s agenda for Tuesday’s Regular Council Meeting next week, is a proposed agreement between the City and the Newburgh Industrial Development Agency. On the tentative agenda this is described in these two items under 3. Planning and Development/Community Development & Real Estate:
d. Discussion of City and IDA partnership
e. (Res. 19) Agreement with the IDA to receive 2012 CDBG funds in order to carry out special economic development projects.
According to the contact, which is attached to the agenda, the Newburgh IDA will receive no more than $30,000 in HUD CDBG funds in return for the services outlined in the contract.
Contract is sloppy
It is unclear what the origins of this contract were, but with errors such as the term “the Executive Director of the City” (What is That? OK, I’m guessing it’s city manager, but still…) repeatedly used (page 4 of contract, 24 of agenda) and typos, one wonders if this was diligently constructed.
“Scope of services” – isn’t this what the IDA should be doing anyway?
Looking at Attachment A, Scope of Services, I am astounded that the NIDA requires an additional $30,000 from the city’s precious CDBG funds just so they can do things like make a list of resources for small businesses, or meet with two businesses a month. In fact, everything listed on this attachment would be a reasonable expectation for what the Executive Director of the NIDA and/or the Department of Planning and Development should be doing already. AND, these people are already under contract with staff positions. While I have made a Freedom of Information Law request for the contracts of NIDA Executive Director Teri Waivada, and do not yet know the details of her compensation, I do know that the planning and development staff are very generously compensated.
Turning down this bogus contract would free up the CDBG funds for more appropriate candidates, and in a city like ours, there are plenty who would put the funding to good use.
NIDA Board’s double standards
On September 29, 2008, the Newburgh IDA board met with Ed Schorno, who came before the board to propose that his company, CIDC/CDIC, be retained for another year on a consulting basis to provide small business counseling and guidance. The board scoffed at Mr. Schorno and CIDC/CDIC, and rejected his offer. According to the minutes of that meeting, Joshua Smith suggested that resources were available through the Orange County Community College. The minutes conclude on this point that “It would appear from the discussion that there is a consensus among the board members that t [sic] might make sense for those small projects to seek assistance elsewhere before they used the services of CIDC which bills the IDA at the rate of $200 an hour.”
Mr. Smith and others on the board and in the city were poisoned by CIDC’s president, William Loewenstein, and his original contract for the Newburgh City Courthouse. Two years after the courthouse plans were botched by consensus, Mr. Schorno and CIDC/CDIC must suffer guilt by association — no matter how worthwhile and praiseworthy this entirely different person doing a completely different type of work was.
Meanwhile, Ms. Waivada was hired after retiring from the Westchester County IDA on the recommendation of the Newburgh IDA’s counsel, Tom Whyatt. She was hired ONE YEAR AGO by our IDA as a certification consultant. One year later, and the IDA is still not certified, but Ms. Waivada has been promoted to Executive Director of the agency. In board meetings, nobody even bothers to hold Ms. Waivada’s feet to the fire on the certification issue. Ms. Waivada can also barely manage to respond to FOIL requests properly. Below is the screen shots of my recent correspondence with her:
Ms. Waivada’s track record on certification is 0 for 0, while enjoying a full year of contracted salary. At this rate, why should we entrust $30,000 of precious CDBG funds to her oversight at all? And how is it that the IDA board can be so dismissive of Mr. Schorno, while entertaining Ms. Waivada’s CDBG whims and excusing her glaring deficiencies without so much as a twitch of conscience? Or are any of them also personal friends of Ms. Waivada?
Perhaps it is time for the New York State Authorities Budget Office to finally act on its persistent threats and put the Newburgh IDA out of business. If the gentlemen would like to continue with their social club, they can do so without the city’s dime.
