Quantcast

Intimidation is insult

To the editor:
Re: “Last-ditch attempt to stop Chinatown B.I.D.” (news article by Aline Reynolds, July 20)

Owners of 562 Chinatown small properties filed the required notarized statements and deeds within the mere 30 days allotted to organize and express their written opposition to Councilmember Margaret Chin’s fierce advocacy to form a Chinatown Business Improvement District. The large number of objections to the B.I.D. was historic according to the City Clerk’s office.

Yet Chin says we have used “intimidation tactics” to garner support. This is an insult to the intelligence of these property owners who are adamantly opposed to a Chinatown B.I.D. If anything, we took the time to educate property owners as to the true implications of a B.I.D. We even translated into Chinese the actual objection form, which no one else had done.

Only 550 property owners cast a ballot for the B.I.D. out of a total of 2,300 benefited properties that exist within the proposed district. Despite the poor outreach, Chin and her group have been trumpeting a 97 percent approval rate based on this small ratio (the 97 percent is out of 550 respondents, not out of the overall number of properties). While B.I.D. objections could only be filed by vetted property owners, no standard of official verification was applied to those who supported the B.I.D. Where’s the fairness here? Your paper failed to mention these two very important facts.

Pat Smith of Rubenstein Associates Public Relations firm, (who is also the official spokesman for the proposed Soho B.I.D.) along with Margaret Chin and Wellington Chen have launched a campaign in the past few weeks defaming us and calling us liars in both English and Chinese language media. If anything, this only demonstrates their desperation and disrespect for the very people who are preserving Chinatown’s small businesses. Chin has chosen to sugar coat the B.I.D. fees and disassociate it from a permanent tax.

The one-time $1.9 million government funds being withheld from the community and offered as an incentive only if a B.I.D. is formed is actually “bait” money that unfairly influences the process of B.I.D. formation. Once the B.I.D. is formed the taxes and fees shouldered by the property owners and businesses will, in essence, be permanent. Despite the B.I.D.s claim that their board can vote itself out of existence at any time, this is has no basis in reality. B.I.D.s in the past have never been dismantled because they are deliberately designed to make it virtually impossible to deconstruct.

Councilmember Chin founded the Chinatown Partnership, garnered campaign funds from its members and lobbied for its transition to a B.I.D. for years. Why is Margaret Chin dismissing and disparaging the concerns of the immigrant community that elected her by accusing opponents of her B.I.D. of intimidation and lies? Is she now the official mouthpiece for real estate developers in Chinatown and Soho? With having used all these resources, including her influence on the City Council, who has she really been intimidating?
Sincerely,
Jan Lee,
The Coalition Against the Chinatown BID