I just got this under my door:
I don’t know what it means when they say “have not yet received an answer from the election company”. Maybe someone else can enlighten me?
1) Not true. There was a bid and the results were even posted in the lobbies for a while. On top of that, Scott Silberman isn’t a contractor, he’s an engineer, so it’s ridiculous to write he “offered to complete necessary labor”. He was proposed as the owner’s rep but HPD didn’t even let him bid for that position because they felt his small operation (it’s really a one-man consultancy) couldn’t handle overseeing a project this size. The reason he keeps getting brought up is because he originally favored making Luna Park a permanent construction site and repairing as needed. Who wants to live like that? What they fail to mention is that we brought him back in after the last election and he said that if the free city money brings the full facade repair to nearly the same cost as his plan then he would favor full facade repair! You will never hear Tatyana mention it but it’s in the minutes: http://www.box.net/shared/xq4a2sja6k
2) This is true.
3) Why do they say it’s an extremely high annual interest rate? It’s actually very low for a commercial loan of this magnitude.
4) Tatyana is not a licensed architect nor does she work on similar projects. I think she gets coffee for people who work on school buildings. It’s true we discovered the necessity of asbestos removal after the fact but it’s also true we reduced our costs by changing the insulation requirement. Things like this happen on jobs of this scale. The fairytale comment is just someone being ignorant and it’s important to note how Tatyana fought tooth and nail to hire Superstructures — calling them the best in the city — but can’t stop insulting them now that they disagree with her.
FYI, none of the items in that letter are “gross violations of Mitchell-Lama Laws” and absolutely everything has been approved by HPD, the agency charged with enforcing compliance to those rules. Duh. I’d love for this ignorant anonymous person to step forward here and tell us what they’d do differently for shareholders going forward. All I hear are complaints about things they know little about and can do even less to change but nothing at all on what they plan to deliver if elected.