‘THE SENATE. cue ‘STATE OF NEWYORK Tava ce I bans TONY AVELLA soon BouLe cucu AFPunsroun SENATOR, 11TH DISTRICT ‘sumec eecnons ASSISTANT CONFERENCE LEADER cu same omnce oust FOR POLICY & ADMINISTRATION OF THE tra rae ae April 29, 2015 Hon, Scott Stringer New York City Comptroller Office of the Comproller City of New York One Centre Street New York, NY 10007 FAX & MAIL Immediate Attention Required Dear Comptroller Stringer: 1 am writing to follow up on my December 22,2014 and January 23, 2015 letters to you regarding the proposed contract by Samaritan Village, Ine. to operate a transitional residence for hhomeless families et the Pan Am Hotel, located at 79-00 Queens Boulevard Unfortunately, have not received your response to either of my letters. |Lwas recently informed thatthe contract was forwarded to your office on April 16 for review and that you have 3) days o either reject or sig this contrac. As indicated in my previous correspondence, | urge you to disapprove this application for the following reasons: 1. Tas Coteact VIOLATES THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, §21-12400). °‘The New York City Administrative Code §21-124(b) requires that each unit in a family shelter ‘be equipped with cooking facilites as wel as a bathroom, a reffigerator and an adequate sleeping area, While I understand thatthe shelter provides three meals per day in accordance with Section 900.2, Title 18 ofthe New York Code, Rules and Regulation (NYCRR) itis not the same as providing cooking facilites, | 2012, The Bloomberg Administration proposed to shelter multiple families in apartment style ‘units in an effort to save money. However, this proposal was rejected by the City Council, specifically due tothe reason that it would require amending NYC Administrative Code §21 124(b). The City Counc! further responded that it has no intention of changing the law that was {intended to protect the safety of children and families. Approving this contracts not only in direct contradiction with the existing law, but woul also indicate a blatant disregard forthe City Council's commitment to provide shelters that protect safety and welfare ofthe homeless families and children, [THE PUBLIC REVIEW AND BIDDING PROCESS FOR THIS CONTRACT NEED TO BE (CLOSELY EXAMINED PRIOR TO DECIDING WHETHER TO AWARD THE CONTRACT. In genera, the Department of Homeless Services (DHS) utilizes an open-ended request for proposal (REP) for procaring homeless shelters pursuant to Section 3-03(b)(2) of the Procurement Policy Board Rules. This process involves publication of quarterly solicitations in the City records, notification to the affected Community Boards and a statement to the Mayor, ‘Community Board, Borough President and the Department of City Planning, describing how the affected community was consulted with in selecting the shelter site. In the ease of Pan Am, Tunderstand that your office, with the consent ofthe Corporation Counsel, approved an emergency declaration to open an emergency homeless shelter on a temporary basis from June to December in 2014. Since Pan Am shelter was developed under an ‘emergency declaration, was not required to comply withthe City's standard public involvement process and other procedural requisites generally required for open-ended RFP. ‘This meant that the community was given little to no opportunity to review the contract and engage in the siteselection process. The emergency declaraton did not extend more than 6 months, ending in December, 2014. At that point, DHS was reqsired to follow the standard procedure to procure Pan Am homeless shelter on a permanent tasis via an open-ended RFP process. However, it is unclear whether DHS and Samaritan Vilage were held to the same standards of REP process as they attempted to continue the emergency shelter as a permanent facility. From my understanding, in applying for their permanent contract, neither DHS nor Samaritan Village engaged in the public notification and engagement process in continuing to use the site ‘For this reason, [feel that DHS was allowed to bypass many important aspects ofan open-ended [REP processIIL. Gre sustenous HEALTH AND SAFETY VIOLATIONS, I STRONGLY FEEL THAT PAN AMIS NOT THE APPROPRIATE SITE TO SHELTER FAMILIES NOR SHOULD SAMARITAN ‘VILLAGE BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE OPERATING THE SHELTER. ‘The enclosed Daily News article published on April 28, 2015 reveals hazardous conditions of Pan Am shelter, shedding light on the 5-feet high piles of garbage in the shelter premises and a severe rat infestation, I wrote tothe Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) on December 15, 2014 and again on January 22, 2015, regarding numerous complaints filed and violations issued at Pan Am ste. The complaints included bedbugs and lack of hot water and heat, In addition, several violations including a violation for lead paint hazard were issued based onthe shelter residents’ complaints. While I was subsequently informed by HPD that lead violation was closed. and replaced by a less hazardous violation after an investigation, Iam still concerned about the possibility of lead pain in the building. Given that thisbuilding is being utilized for homeless families, including young children, | strongly believe that the entire bullding should be inspected for lead paint, It ws not until 1960 that the City of New York banned the use of lead paint, and as you will note from the enclosed document, the construction of Pan Am Hotel began many years prior to 1960, This indicates that lead-paint hazards presumably exist inthis building. ‘am also concemed about awarding the contract to Samaritan Village. The organization failed to ‘operate the temporary shelter at Pan Am ina responsible manner, potentially jeopardizing the heath and safety of many families and children Who reside at the site, In addition, as {stated in my previous eters to you, an audit conducted by the New York State ‘Comptroller in February, 2014, Samaritan Village was paid nealy $1 Million in inappropriate ‘and questionable expenses over a one-year period. Given ths information, I asked that no futher action be taken on this contract until the State recovers the fall amount of improperly paid funds ‘rom Samaritan Village. [also asked what, if any is the policy for awarding a City contrat to a ‘nonprofit that has a history of misappropriation, to which I never received your answer, For the reasons I stated above, I once again strongly urge you to reject this application, Sincerely, Tee Tony‘Avella Seater 11" Senatorial District TAs}