Office of Dennis M. Walsh The Review Officer 90 Civ.

5722 (SDNY) (RMB)

Fitzmaurice & Walsh, LLP 15 Chester Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 dmwfw@verizon.net 914.437.9058

January 17, 2012 Via Email Patrick Nee President, Local Union 157 395 Hudson Street New York, NY 10014 Re: Proposed Appointments Dear Mr. Nee: This is in response to your undated letter sent to me via email on January 15, 2012, purporting to appoint an Executive Committee Delegate pro tem and two persons as Delegates pro tem to fill vacancies in office until an election is held. As Paragraph 5.b.i.3 of the Stipulation and Order requires prior notice of appointments, I will regard the letter as notice of your intention to make such appointments. The Bylaws of the New York City District Council (the Bylaws) were published pursuant to Paragraph 12 of the Stipulation and Order. The Bylaws are the result of extensive negotiations between my office and the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (the UBC), which agreed to the final terms within. The Bylaws recognize the goals of the Consent Decree entered in 1994 and the Stipulation and Order entered in this matter on June 3, 2010, and towards that end contain numerous exceptions to the Constitution of the UBC, including the direct election of the EST and other District Council officers by the rank and file members of affiliated local unions, the establishing of a 100-member delegate body with delegates allotted to local unions based on the number of members of the local union, the establishing of a unique Trial Committee and procedures, and the establishing of numerous functions and processes not contemplated by the UBC Constitution -- e.g., an HR function, as well as an Inspector General and a Chief Compliance Officer. Indeed, due to the history of corruption and racketeering in the District Council, the UBC itself recognizes that New

York requires many exceptions to its Constitution in order to realize the court-ordered goals of the Consent Decree and the Stipulation and Order. There is no position of executive committee delegate. The Bylaws established an executive committee. Each local union has one member. It is not a delegate position. Section 12 of the Bylaws states the executive committee shall be a subcommittee of the delegate body and shall consist of one member of each local union nominated and elected by secret ballot of the membership directly, and the president, vice president and executive secretary (emphasis added). I also note that Section 4(b) of the District Council Bylaws expressly states the Council Delegate Body shall be elected by the rank and file members of the United Brotherhood of each affiliated local union. Thus, the plain language of Sections 4 and 12 of the Bylaws (appended to the Third Interim Report of the Review Officer as Exhibit 6) requires that delegates and executive committee members be elected directly by local union members via secret ballot elections. The language is as clear as can be and the intent obvious: democratic process is required in New York in light of the egregious record of corruption and racketeering and the ameliorative goals of the Consent Decree and Stipulation and Order. The delegate body and executive committee were seated and sworn on January 11, 2012. You were informed by letter dated December 1, 2011, that the person elected as the Local 157 executive committee member, Daniel De Morato, had resigned. I note that you have thus been aware of the need to hold a special election to fill that vacated position but that since that time you have decided to take no steps to hold such an election. If you had acted promptly, and in the best interests of the members, Local 157 could have by now completed or be very near to completing that election process and would now or very soon have a duly-elected executive committee member. In my view, any concern that you currently may have regarding the representation of your members at the District Council could have been avoided by your insuring that such representation be achieved promptly and democratically -- rather than willfully and subjectively through a purported appointment six weeks after the vacancy occurred. None of the Sections of the Bylaws you cite in your letter [1, 4(A), 7(C), 7(E), 12(A), 16(A)] support the theory upon which you rely. Accordingly, pursuant to Paragraph 5.b.iii.e of the Stipulation and Order, I hereby veto the proposed pro tem appointments described in your letter as inconsistent with the goals of the Stipulation and Order and as being plainly at odds with the express and unambiguous wording of the Bylaws, which were crafted to further the goals of and published pursuant to the Stipulation and Order.

I also recommend pursuant to Paragraph 5.h.viii of the Stipulation and Order that you take immediate steps to mitigate the anti-democratic consequences of your delay by providing for notice of nominations and elections to fill the vacancies in the positions at issue and that you do so should any further vacancies occur. Truly yours, Dennis M. Walsh Review Officer Cc: AUSA Benjamin Torrance AUSA Tara La Morte EST Michael Bilello Brian Quinn, Esq. Bridget Rohde, Esq. Josh Leicht, Esq.