NYC Finance Commissioner Finally Ousted Over Scandals

A month after allegations and evidence mounted against NYC Finance Commissioner Martha Stark moonlighted at a second job and provided jobs to relatives, she's been canned by Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The mayor had asked the city Department of Investigation and Conflicts of Interest Board to investigate after the Post reported that Stark is romantically involved with ex-assistant commissioner Dara Ottley- Brown.

Post reports also said that Stark:

* Hired three of her own relatives.

* Gave a job to Brown's ex-husband, Jodie.

* Secretly served as a director of a real-estate firm while she was commissioner. She resigned from the company, Tarragon Corp., after a Post report in March.

Sources said Stark had told the Mayor's Office she did not have a relationship with any of her subordinates.

COIB and DOI representatives declined comment Tuesday.

A City Hall source said it's "unlikely" that Stark will face criminal charges. Stark and her lawyer also declined requests for comment.

Dara Ottley-Brown was earning $65,000 in 2003 as a mid-level manager. She was named assistant commissioner in November 2004 with a salary of $120,984 and her pay rose to $138,013 in two years.

In 2006 she was appointed a commissioner of the Board of Standards and Appeals with a salary of $139,827. Brown's husband was hired at Finance as a graphic designer earning $78,000 shortly after he filed for divorce in 2007.

Stark also came under fire recently for allowing an administrative judge with the Parking Violations Bureau who is married to her first deputy commissioner to bill for office hours when he was not at work.

The amazing thing is that criminal charges aren't likely to stem from the investigation, despite the cronyism and nepotism.

NYC Finance Commissioner Moonlighting At Second Job

New York City faces one of the worst fiscal situations it has encountered since its near collapse in the 1970s. So, what does the City's Finance Commissioner do at a time like this?

Martha Stark decides to moonlight to supplement her $189,700 income at a job that rakes in another $97,000 a year.

What does the City's ethics board think of all this? They rubber stamped the move.

In secret.

Stark, 48 - who makes a $189,700 salary as the city's chief of real-estate assessment and tax collection - works on the side at Tarragon Corp., a Manhattan-based company that builds apartment complexes in New Jersey, Connecticut and several other states.

Tarragon paid her $90,316 in 2007 and $44,126 in 2006, company filings show. That included $104,000 in cash plus stocks and stock options.

No other city commissioner or department head enjoys a similar outside gig, officials said.

But the Mayor's Office said it was unaware of Stark's extracurricular employment until The Post inquired about it Friday.

"We've just learned of the matter, and we're reviewing it expeditiously," said Mayor Bloomberg spokesman Marc LaVorgna.

The City Charter requires that department heads "give whole time to the duties of the office and . . . not engage in any other occupation, profession or employment."

Stark joined Tarragon as a member of its board of directors in December 2005.

Stark would not comment, but her office released a confidential April 11, 2005, letter from Steven Rosenfeld, chairman of the city's Conflicts of Interest Board, saying her work for Tarragon "would not violate" city rules, under certain conditions.

Stark would have to recuse herself from any city matter involving Tarragon or its officers or shareholders, among other restrictions, the board letter said.

Based on information from Stark, the letter said that Tarragon did not own any property or real-estate investments in the city, but that its president Robert Rothenberg, had an interest in seven rent-stabilized co-op apartments.

The letter also said the city Law Department told Stark that her work for Tarragon "would not conflict" with the City Charter's "whole time" rule for commissioners.

Law Department spokeswoman Kate Ahlers told The Post that it had a "long-standing view" that the charter "permits occasional outside activity, such as service on a board, writing, or teaching" that involves minimal time.

How exactly does the Law Department believe that Stark's work for Tarragon doesn't conflict with the whole time rule let alone the fact that Tarragon is paying for Stark's contacts and influence within the City's government? There are reasons that the ethics rules limit such arrangements because of the appearance of impropriety.

Stark had better explain herself, and the City has to come up with a better reason for why this particular ruling was kept secret.