May 27, 2017 — LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (SUN) —
Over the past 15 months I have been asked by many devotees about the situation at the Brooklyn temple and specifically about the sale of that property. Most of the concerned devotees know that I am a New York attorney who has been studying and publishing reports about New York Religious Corporation law in relation to New York ISKCON temples from at least as far back as 1992. Over the past couple of years, I have not only kept track of developments, but have actively been involved in obtaining information and relevant documents and have shared those with members of the ISKCON Governing Body Commission ("Commission"), congregants of the Brooklyn temple, and any other persons who are interested. I do not represent anyone in the matter nor do I believe that I have a bias, other than a bias toward the written orders of Srila Prabhupada. In other words, I am against any sale unless I see clear and convincing evidence of the need for a sale.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Legal title to the property at 305 Schermerhorn Street is in the name Bharati Center, Inc. On May 15, 2017, the Commission's Brooklyn Sale Committee announced in a public meeting that they have seen a contract of sale and that it was for "almost $60 million" and that the property is still under contract. In New York the conveyance of a property owned by a religious corporation is not effective unless and until the owner has obtained written approval for the sale from either the Office of the State Attorney General ("OAG") or the local state court.
Early this year I obtained from a reliable source a copy of a 6 page pdf file which has the heading:
SALIENT POINTS
Excerpted from the "ALCOTT OPINION LETTER" dated October 14, 2016:
That file, entitled, "Alcott_Salient_Points_01152017.pdf", is available here, and it appears to be a summary of a letter dated October 14, 2016, from Daniel Alcott, attorney to the Commission's "Brooklyn Sale Committee." Although Mr. Alcott makes several major errors, I do not want to address them at this time. I will, however, point out that Mr. Alcott stated on page 4 that the OAG sent Bharati Center, Inc., a letter, dated April 29, 2016, rejecting the petition from Bharati to be allowed to sell the property. The letter contained the following:
"[t]he petition does not...demonstrat[e]...the approval of the transaction and the use of the proceeds by the voting membership of the petitioner. See requirements for such approval in the Guide, inter alia, at page 8 and 11. In the case of petitioner, an Article 10 Religious Corporation, the voting membership is broadly defined in the RCL to include both members and regular devotees/donors. The Attorney General considers approval of the congregation to be an essential element of any petition to sell congregational assets by an Article 10 Religious Corporation. Without such approval, the
petition does not meet the statutory requirements and there is no plausible manner in which our office or a court could find that the transaction is fair and reasonable and in the interest of petitioner and its congregation as required by the core mandate of N-PCL § 511."
The OAG's expert and relevant opinion is that neither the OAG nor a New York court would accept as sufficient any filing by the Bharati Center management for approval of the sale unless and until the Congregation approves the sale.
The Bharati Center management may pay a filing fee with the court in an attempt to get a hearing to get court approval for the sale, but then the judge will grant the motion of the OAG or objectors to adjourn the hearing until such time as the Bharati Center management obtains congregational approval of the sale. In the alternative, the court could simply deny the court petition of the Bharati Center management.
Therefore, the sale of the Brooklyn property is stuck in limbo and will be unless the Bharati Center management obtains approval from the congregation at a properly called meeting or changes its mind about that sale.
If you have any questions, please feel free to email me at Harvey108@hotmail.com.
Hare Krishna.
Mrigendra dasa
Harvey Mechanic
Attorney at Law
3755 Watseka Ave Suite 201
Los Angeles, CA 90034
310.853.0186
Member of New York Bar
