RIOC Board Still Has Nothing To Say About Reasons For Former President Steve Shane's Departure - But Roosevelt Island Residents Comment On Situation

Image Of June 2010 RIOC Board Meeting

Explaining why he he was the only resident Director of the Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC) to not sign last week's statement by the six other resident RIOC Directors to the Roosevelt Island community, RIOC Director Director David Kraut wrote:

... I just couldn't see the sense of it. We're not allowed to talk about the subject that is most on peoples' minds, so why fill up space with a laundry list of stuff the corporation was already doing anyway?

The subject that Mr. Kraut points out the RIOC Directors are not supposed to talk about is the reason for the departure/resignation/firing of former RIOC President/CEO Steve Shane. Perhaps at tonight's Special RIOC Board of Directors meeting a full and complete statement will be forthcoming, but I doubt it:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that special meeting of the Board of Directors will be held on Wednesday, August 4, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. at the Manhattan Park Community Center, 8 River Road, Roosevelt Island, New York, for the purpose of transacting such business as shall come before the Board

I have been trying to obtain some meaningful comment from RIOC Board members on this subject for over a month and have received the same response - it's a personnel matter and the RIOC Board members are not permitted by law to speak about it. Here's one of several messages I have sent to RIOC Board members on the subject including this one directed at DHCR Commissioner/RIOC Chairperson Brian Lawlor

... Following the June 28 RIOC Board of Directors Meeting in which former President Steve Shane departed as President of RIOC, I asked you to comment on the situation. You replied only that Mr. Shane went on "leave, pending retirement" and had no further comment.

As of 5:00 PM today (July 1), no official explanation has been given by the Roosevelt Island Operating Corp. for Mr. Shane's departure as RIOC President. If the reason for Mr. Shane's departure has anything to do with the conduct of official RIOC business or RIOC governance policy, a full and complete explanation should be provided to the Roosevelt Island community by the RIOC Board. Failure to do so by this new, elected Board of Roosevelt Island residents to provide a complete rendition of the reason for Mr. Shane's departure will only engender mistrust and disappointment in the Board Directors by members of the community.

Of course if the reason for Mr. Shane's departure had nothing to do with official business or governance policy, just report that and end a controversy which will surely arise if you continue to remain quiet on this issue. Otherwise, just reveal the facts to the Roosevelt Island public.

I would like to offer you the opportunity to comment again so that members of the Roosevelt Island community can understand the reason for Mr. Shane's departure - was it a matter of official business and governance policy or was it purely a personal matter. You should be aware that I have received expressions of great shock, surprise and concern as to the reason why this occurred.

If you have already decided to make some sort of statement but plan on releasing it only to the print newspaper Main Street WIRE, I ask you to extend the same courtesy of providing an explanation to Roosevelt Island residents who receive their news online as you do to those who receive it via newspapers.

Thank you.

Never received a response from Mr. Lawlor.

I asked several Roosevelt Island residents for their thoughts and comments on the Steve Shane/RIOC Board situation. Here they are.

From Ashton Barfield:

I am neither a fan nor a foe of Steve Shane. I saw enough of him over the past three-plus years to appreciate his intelligence, knowledge, expertise, and accomplishments on our behalf. I also saw enough to be aware of some of the warts on his performance and his personality. But there are lots of things that I don’t know about his performance. Most of us don’t know them. And we would all like to know them, in view of the RIOC Board’s dissatisfaction with him.

But the Board can’t talk about Shane’s deficiencies in public – not before firing him, not after firing him. That’s standard privacy practice in personnel matters. Violating that privacy is not only morally objectionable, but can also be legally actionable. The privacy expectation doesn’t change when terminated staff talks/complains publicly about being fired -- even if it’s with exaggeration and misrepresentation (at a time when it would seem advisable to be scrupulous about one’s credibility...). The Board still can’t violate Shane’s privacy by airing their views. And he knows it, and he’s exploiting the situation.

Wait, that’s negative supposition about Shane’s motives -- and I don’t want to engage in that. One of the things that’s bugged me over the past month is all the negative supposition, and how lopsided it’s been. There hasn’t been much supposition about the possibility of genuine transgressions on Shane’s part. But there’s been plenty of negative supposition about the Board’s motives for the firing and for the silence.

The firing? Oh, that’s because they’re drunk with power, and/or pettily vindictive, and/or venal (privatization), and/or stupid/incompetent.

The silence? Oh, that’s because they’re indifferent to the electorate’s reasonable expectation of an explanation, or ashamed of what they did and/or ashamed of how they did it.

A lot of heat, not much light.

Let’s engage in a little alternative supposition. Maybe they would really like to talk about it. Maybe they’d like to have you know why they felt that Shane shouldn’t continue in his job. Maybe they’d like to be able to explain the awkwardness of the June 28 Board meeting. Maybe they feel anguished that they can’t be answerable to the community. Maybe they’re not thrilled at being caught between two competing obligations. It certainly can’t be fun having a bunch of puzzled, discouraged, frustrated, distrustful, offended, and/or angry constituents (and neighbors and friends) – not to mention being unable to plain old defend themselves. Maybe their silence is courage rather than disdain or cowardice.

I don’t know. Neither do you. And we’re not going to, about this particular situation.

But that doesn’t mean that they’re not still accountable to us. We expect a well-run, comfortable, affordable community, with transparent, responsive, effective governance by an elected board of our fellow residents and an able professional staff.

Let’s see if this Board delivers that in the future. Let’s see what they accomplish during the remaining years of their respective tenures. And let’s see whether they meet our high standards for communication, and consultation, with their constituents.

If not, we can vigorously vote for other representatives when the time comes.

For identification purposes only, Ms Barfield is the chairperson of the Roosevelt Island Resident's Association (RIRA) Government Relations Committee. The views expressed here are Ms. Barfield's and not in any official RIRA capacity. A version of this statement also appeared in the 7/31/10 Main Street WIRE.

From Steve Marcus:

There is an long list of gripes I have with Mr. Shane. I am thankful that it is water over the dam and that we have a chance to get some competent and responsive leadership that can accept the direction provided by our board - who, with the exception of David Kraut and two state appointees, is democratically elected.

Except for some of the big ticket items - 25 Miilion for a new tram, 2 million plus for astroturf, 2 million plus for a new digs for our Public Safety department that most residents find particularly unwarranted, Mr Shane has dragged his feet and was publicly at odds with the the two initiatives of most importance to both the the Board and the residents - privatization of Mitchell Lama buildings and rental of storefronts (most of Main Street's businesses have closed, their premises now shuttered, despite interest by a large number of serious potential businesses)

We are indebted to Mr. Shane for his facilitation of elections which permitted residents to elect a majority of representatives on the Board that was formerly comprised of toadies and rubber-stamps. I share Mr. Shane's sense of irony, but not his disapproval, that this board was the one to unseat him.

I am alarmed to hear that that yet another hand-picked Albany appointee is rumored to take his place. What this community needs is a competent administrator with significant experience in serving our infrastructure and real-estate needs. Government connections are also valuable and important, but should not be the primary qualification that is sought.

However, this board speaks for us, every bit as much as Micah Kellner speaks for his district or Barack Obama speaks for our nation. We may not agree with everything our elected representatives say, but this is the best system yet devised, and we have the collective opportunity to change our leaders on a regular basis

For identification purposes, Mr. Marcus is a RIRA Common Council Member. The views expressed are his and not in any official RIRA capacity.

From David Bauer:

The Board should have the responsibility to hire and fire. The Board must accept the need for their citizen-bosses to understand the reasons for the Board actions.

In a representative democracy:

the ability of the elected policy makers to have their policies carried out by the ministerial staff is important;

the need for the electorate to understand the actions of the elected policy makers is equally important — the electorate must be able to judge whether the elected policy makers properly reflect wishes of the electorate.

If administrative staff resign from a position, the reasons for such resignation may well be kept as confidential by the resigner.

BUT, if administrative staff is discharged for cause, both the staff and the electorate are entitled to a public statement identifying the cause.

If the cause given is illegal activity, the policy makers should file appropriate charges.

If the cause is discontent with the way the staff carries out the established policy, that cause needs to be clearly set forth. The policy makers, for their own protection in maintaining the confidence of the residents, or even in seeking reelection, need to be clear as to the basis for their action.

The July 3 issue of The WIRE carried the platforms of the six resident members of the RIOC Board. In essence they were— for the Island to be middle class with affordable housing, for there to be housing to care for the poor and income restricted, for tenants to be able to become owners, for stores to be rented out, for adequate green space, for affordable facilities, for a tracking system for citizen issues, for a RIOC staff that will accept direction from the Board, for restoring Tram service, for being on the forefront of new ideas for a residential community.

On which items on this list did Steve Shane, and the RIOC staff for which he was responsible, fail?

The RIOC Board members needs to clarify the reason for this surprise firing, both to maintain the confidence of the residents, and to establish some guidelines in finding a replacement.

Coming out if this stress test on Island self governance will need to be a clarification of the roles of the Governor, the DHCR Commissioner, the Board and the RIOC President as well as our representatives in the General Assembly.

For identification purposes, Mr. Bauer was a founding member of the Maple Tree Group, an organization that promoted Roosevelt Island self governance through an elected RIOC Board of Directors. As with the others, the views expressed are Mr. Bauer's and not in any official capacity. A version of Mr. Bauer's statement appeared in the 7/31/10 Main Street WIRE.