Letter to New York State Committee on Open Goverment.

Statement of Facts

Dear Bob Freedom, Director of the Committee On Open Government


On October 22, 2015 at an ULURP sub-committee of CB9, Richard Birack from Borough President Eric Adams attempted to show an unvested, unauthorized presentation at an Open meeting.


If you look at the beginning of this video clip, (2:38 minutes), you can see him setting up and then inquiring why a video camera as playing and insisting that he could not do the presentation if the camera was rolling.


Furthermore, you will see at 19:40 minutes  and 29:24 minutes, Michael Liburd, chairman of the ULURP committee, who is also a trustee the New York City Public Library, engaging in and directing residents and  CB9 board members to engage in the violation of the Open Meetings Law by trying to force Alicia Boyd to turn off her camera.


Michael Liburd instructs everyone to raise their hands who wants Alicia Boyd to violate the Law and for 32 minutes Michael Liburd allows members of the committee to do personal attacks against Alicia Boyd and insists that she’s preventing the community from obtaining vital information, which could help they reached an informed decision. Thus making her the villian and obstructionist in the ULURP committee, that she is a member of.


At the very next open meeting of the ULURP committee, in an act of revenge for Alicia Boyd’s refusal to violate the Open Meetings Law,  and abuse of power, right at the beginning of the meeting, Michael Liburd requests that  Alicia Boyd remove herself  from the table because she was not a part of the ULURP committee, despite the fact that she was a part of the subcommittee who had prepared for this presentation and he used all of her hard work and only her work, for the presentation that was planned for that day.


Michael Librud refused to allow Alicia Boyd to place any motions on the floor to address this issue, (minutes 1:55), stating that she was not a part of the committee and thus had no power to second any motions or to place any motions on the floor to address this whole issue of membership on the committee and penalization of Alicia Boyd.

Intention to Violate the Law

It is common knowledge that Borough President Eric Adams will engage in violations of the law to get this community into a rezoning with the Department of City Planning. That he placed Michael Liburd illegally on the board and now Michael Liburd, despite having no experience or knowledge concerning land use issues is chairing both the ULULP committee and the 197a Committee, both which govern Land use and would be the committees where any rezoning proposals or studies would come out of.


The mere fact that Richard Birack who has worked for over 20 years for the Brooklyn Borough Presidents’ office and is attempting to show a presentation which cannot be done if the Open Meeting Law is not violated demonstrates the total lack of respect for the law that our governmental officials continually display and the level of corruption that is stemming from this official government office.


The lack of transparency surround community board from Borough Hall has been so obvious that an Lawsuit "Article 78", had to be commence just to get Borough President Eric Adams to disclose public information concerning Community Board 9. (Boyd vs Eric Adams Index number 11479/2015)


It is also possible that Richard Biracks “unauthorized” presentation was shown to other community boards and it may have influenced their decisions concerning the position that they have taken regarding the Text amendments (Zoning for Quality and Affordablity "ZQA" and Manditory Inclusionary Housing, "MIH"), now being considered for a vote by the City Council (March 2016).


If these actions are not outright illegal they are definitely in violation of the intention of the law for community boards and  Brooklyn Borough Hall to engage in transparency and accountability.


Furthermore, the penalization of members of the public for engaging in their rights afforded them under the Open Meeting Laws, obviously is unlawful and warrants intervention.


Thus my question to you is this....

I’m aware that the City Charter allows anyone to commence legal proceedings against anyone violating the law including the Open Meeting Law. However, an article 78 can be quite costly and time consuming and not everyone will have the resources to commence such proceedings especially in moderate affordable communities such as mine.


Is there any other recourse that residents can take for intervention or assistance from other governmental bodies to prevent these types of abuses. Is there any directive that your agency can take, after viewing the clear evidence of the intention to violate the OML.


Are there sanctions that can be imposed to direct governmental agencies such as Borough Presidents and Community Boards to help influence them to adhere to these laws.


Can they be required to receive training and who could make such requirements. In other words what other recourse can community residents take to correct abuse and possible corruption at the local level of our government in regards to the OML.

Thank You

Alicia Boyd,

MTOPP, The Movement To Protect The People