« Hudson Railyards suits tossed out by judge | Main | Forest City spearheads D.C. waterfront project »
June 3, 2005
State Supreme Court Justice Herman Cahn's ruling
EXCERPTS:
If there is a rational basis for theBoard’s action, even if the court or the public might have arrived at a different conclusion, the MTA Board’s decision must be affirmed. — page 12
Ultimately, the issue of which plan should be accepted, or whether all of them should be rejected, must be decided by the MTA Board. Those issues are public policy issues which are best left to the Board appointed by the elected officials with that authority, as long as there is no arbitrary or capricious decision. — page 12
The MTA counters that the Jets’ proposal would create more revenue for the City and State, as well as to the MTA. While each side has experts on whom it relies, the court cannot find that the MTA acted arbitrarily and capriciously by choosing to accept the estimates made by the New York City Economic Development Corporation and the New York State Economic Development Corporation, which gave favorable estimates regarding the Jets’ proposal. — page 14
NoLandGrab: Alas, there's nothing arbitrary or capricious about Bloomberg and Doctoroff's ambitious proposals to award large-scale developments to their favorite politically connected pals.
A point in favor of those who claim that five weeks is not enough time for the MTA to solicit bids in the case of the Vanderbilt (aka, Atlantic) Railyards:
The court is not insensitive to MSG’s complaint concerning what might otherwise be considered an unreasonably short period of time (27 days) to respond, within the context of such a complex project. However, given the actual circumstances herein, MSG fails to demonstrate in what way the 27-day deadline benefitted the Jets over MSG. — page 22
Posted by lumi at June 3, 2005 9:19 AM