« September 2005 | Main | November 2005 »
October 31, 2005
DDDb Press Release: In Debate, Mayor Bloomberg Distorts and Misleads on Ratner's Atlantic Yards
Ferrer's Opposition to Atlantic Yards Distinguishes Him From Bloomberg
News Organizations Should Look Skeptically at Mayor's Claim
There are lies, damn lies and made up stuff that Bloomberg rattles off when he hasn't got a clue what he's talking about.
Bloomberg got his facts on Atlantic Yards so unbelievably wrong during yesterday morning's debate that DDDb sent out a press release to set the record straight.
NEW YORK, NY--Over the past week, Bruce Ratner's 9.1 million square foot "Atlantic Yards" development proposal for Prospect Heights, Brooklyn has become a hot potato issue in the mayoral campaign. On Friday, Democratic candidate Freddy Ferrer forcefully announced his opposition to the Ratner plan as it is currently proposed. In the first mayoral debate on Sunday, Mr. Ferrer reemphasized his opposition to Ratner's plan and Mayor Bloomberg reemphasized his support.
Unfortunately, the mayor's supporting comments were incorrect and misleading. In response to Mr. Ferrer's opposition, Mayor Bloomberg said, "Well, I couldn't disagree more. And I think Al Sharpton who supported my opponent said it very well: this is about jobs for people in that community, this is about housing for people in that community. This is a project that has had as much scrutiny as anything: community boards, and scrutiny from the newspapers, and scrutiny from every single state agency thatís involved. This is the right kind of project for the city, builds houses, creates jobs, helps the spirit of Brooklyn, and takes a place that's been vacant for decades--50 years or more--and does something with it that will help this city."
Mr. Bloomberg distorted the record in the following ways:
1. Jobs:
When announced, Ratner's project promised 10,000 office jobs. As it stands today the project would only create space for about 2,336 jobs and, using the New York Economic Development Corporation's calculations, only about 700 of those jobs would be new jobs--and there is no guarantee that even one of those jobs would go to anybody in the community. It also would produce about 1,200 temporary construction jobs , according to the mayor's calculations, with a stated goal of 35% of those jobs for minorities. Rev. Sharpton had said the project would bring "thousands of jobs" to "communities of color." That's clearly a gross exaggeration. Anyone claiming this would bring jobs must also acknowledge the $1 billion-plus public cost of the project--a very expensive and inefficient way to create jobs.2. Housing:
Mayor Bloomberg and ACORN Director Bertha Lewis announced a 50% "affordable" housing agreement in May, regarding 4,500 rental units. Since then, Ratner added 2,800 luxury condos to the project. If public financing is forthcoming, the project would include 2,250 so-called "affordable" housing units, or 31% of 7,300 total units. This means that there will be 5,050 luxury units. Of the 7,300 total units, only 12% would be affordable to people earning Brooklyn's median income or less. So, contrary to the Mayor's statement, the project would provide barely any housing for the people in the community.3. Oversight and Scrutiny:
The Mayor's most out of touch comments concerned oversight, transparency and scrutiny surrounding the Ratner plan. The Ratner plan bypasses all city oversight because the Mayor signed away the City's right to oversight to the state. The community boards have no official role in the project and have provided no meaningful scrutiny; the City Council has no official role, no oversight and no vote when it comes to the Ratner project; there is only one state agency involved in the project (not agencies) -- the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) -- and their oversight and analysis is paid for by Forest City Ratner; the ESDC first appeared in front of the public two years after the project was announced. The ESDC rents space from Bruce Ratner at Ratner's Atlantic Center mall in Brooklyn just across the street from the proposed development--talk about a cozy arrangement.4. Newspaper Scrutiny: Compare the daily drumbeat of "newspaper scrutiny" of the West Side Stadium to the "newspaper scrutiny" of Atlantic Yards and the Mayor's comment doesn't pass the laugh test.
5. Site Location:
Here the Mayor simply lied. The project does not take "...a place that's been vacant for decades..." The proposed project site would require the use of state condemnation and demolition of about 60 properties through the use of eminent domain. The entire project footprint is 22 acres: 8.5 acres are currently functioning MTA/LIRR rail yards, the other 13.5 acres are comprised of city streets, which Ratner would get at a sweetheart price, along with private homes and businesses.
The MTA's Vanderbilt Yard is little more than one-third of the proposed 22-acre Atlantic Yards project site. And, given that this is a crucial place for development, why did the MTA negotiate exclusively with Ratner and accept a bid for less than half the appraised value?
For two years now the Mayor and Mr. Ratner have been portraying the proposed development site as a desolate wasteland. The reality is the project would level an existing mixed-use and multi-ethnic neighborhood.Develop Don't Destroy spokesman Daniel Goldstein said, "We are pleased to see that both candidates have made their positions clear on Atlantic Yards. But we are dismayed that the Mayor bases his support on incorrect information and a fantasyland idea of what is going on with the Ratner plan. In the end the project is about luxury housing, the most expensive basketball arena ever built, a paltry fraction of the jobs initially promised, and Mr. Ratner's profits--all requiring an enormous public investment. It is not about the community and it is not for the community.
We support sustainable development and union job creation over the rail yards. But we do not, and cannot, support a secret, taxpayer-subsidized, sweetheart, backroom deal that destroys our communities and displaces our neighbors–all paid for with enormous public subsidies.
We expect that in the second debate on Tuesday night the Mayor and Mr. Ferrer won't get a free ride again when discussing Atlantic Yards."
Posted by lumi at 9:34 PM
BUILD gets a pay cut
The Real Estate Observer
Matthew Schuerman
BUILD, the community organization supporting the Atlantic Yards project, released parts of its revised IRS forms Friday, this time neatly typed, and acknowledges that its earlier application for nonprofit status was in error. James Caldwell, the president and CEO, will only get $69,000 a year, down from $125,000, and Marie Louis, chief operating officer, will get $60,000, down from $100,000.
Posted by lumi at 9:30 PM
Happy Halloween: Rat In Peace
From a Clinton Hill haunted house featured in Brownstoner.
Posted by lumi at 9:27 PM
Welcome to Ratnerville
The Brooklynite
by Daniel Triman
Increasingly it feels as if Brooklyn has become Ratnerville. The well-connected Ratner practically owns the corridors of power. His developments rake in massive government subsidies. He doles out goodies to all the right people.
...
Ratner may not know how to build beautiful things, but he knows how to get things built. That’s why the man who has already given Brooklyn three awful mega-developments seems set to give us a fourth.
Posted by lumi at 1:32 PM
TimesRatnerReport feeds Atlantic Yards News addiction
Addicted to Atlantic Yards coverage? If you haven't gotten your fix, check out TimesRatnerReport for analysis of every nitty-gritty detail on what coverage there is.
Ferrer vs. Bloomberg on Atlantic Yards (and it barely makes the Times)
Ferrer fumbles facts while Bloomberg bulldozes them. Check out the mayoral candidates' exchange on the Yards and The NY Times's coverage.
An alternate version of the Pace Poll--could tougher questions have made a difference?
The Pace poll published last week has been criticized for not asking the hard questions. Oder makes some suggestions for next time around, but places the blame on the media for inadequate coverage.
Questions about the CBA: Is this "systemic change in doing business"?
So, is the Community Benefits Agreement regarding Atlantic Yards supposed to help the local "community" or the minority "community"? There's an interesting tension there, because the signatories are local (and minority), but several beneficiaries are hardly local, with none based in Brooklyn and some outside New York City.
Posted by lumi at 7:12 AM
They’re Taking Away Your Property for What?
The Court’s eminent-domain ruling is useless as well as unjust.
City Journal
Nicole Gelinas
A scathing article on the history of using eminent domain as a tool for centralized urban planning, with a big focus on the eminent domain-addicted Bruce Ratner:
As planners recognized that they couldn’t solve the problem of housing (and uplifting) the poor, and certainly couldn’t remake entire cities, they scaled back, rather than relinquished, their ambitions. By the seventies and eighties, cities focused on using eminent domain to build sterile business districts and industrial centers to trap disappearing well-paying jobs in inner cities, or to build convention centers, stadiums, and subsidized hotels to lure free-spending out-of-towners. Eminent domain for urban renewal morphed into eminent domain for economic development—with similarly dismal results.
Posted by lumi at 6:30 AM
October 30, 2005
Mike Lupica: Shooting from the Lip
Lupica fires back at the editorial board of his own paper in his weekly sports wrap-up:
I love it when people praise Ratner's project because it's using eight acres of railyards over there near Atlantic Ave., and completely ignore the fact that the size of this project is more than twice that.
Forget about steroids in baseball.
It's Ratner's land grab that's always been on the juice here.
And the only one with a real voice telling the truth about all this right now is Freddy Ferrer.
Posted by lumi at 5:20 PM
Ferrer and the Two Rats
The Village Voice's 2005 campaign blog, Power Plays, muses on the two Giant Rats at Ferrer's Friday press conference.
The Post asked: What about the rat? "I see some of the Bloomberg people here," Ferrer replied. Then he raised his finger to emphasize: "And I have two rats."
NoLandGrab: Ha! The irony of a Giant Rat infestation (enlarge image) in Prospect Heights was not lost on Brooklynites at the press conference.
Posted by lumi at 5:14 PM
Ratner execs huddle with heads of CB2
Another Community Board/Ratner scandal is brewing:
Two days after skipping the first public hearing on the environmental impact of the proposed Atlantic Yards mega-development, the executive committee [of Community Board 2] met privately with Forest City Ratner Executive Vice President James Stuckey and other top company brass.
Though some Board Members felt the meeting was "innapropriate":
Jon Quint, a member of the CB2 transportation committee and a former chair of the committee, said he didn’t see anything sinister about the private meeting.
“Most of the real work gets done in the committee meetings whether it’s the executive committee or the traffic committee,” he said. “That’s where the nitty-gritty gets done and if they had a meeting with Forest City Ratner, I am sure they got more done then we ever would at a public meeting.”
NoLandGrab: The testimony of members of CB6 and 8 made the absence of CB2 at the ESDC hearing all the more conspicuous.
Posted by lumi at 4:54 PM
Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards project ‘Affordable’ units may go to Crown Hts.
The Brooklyn Papers
by Ariella Cohen
Is Ratner planning on moving the poor folk out of the Yards?
Forest City Ratner is considering the acquision of the former St. Mary’s Hospital in Crown Heights, leading some to speculate that the 3-acre site could be used for the affordable housing component of the proposed Atlantic Yards mega-project.
In a non-binding memorandum of understanding (MOU), dated May 17, 2005, between Forest City and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), Forest City promised, among other things, to construct 600-1,000 “affordable for-sale units” in return for ACORN’s support of the project.
The off-site option for affordable home building has drawn criticism from community advocates who claim that by separating the luxury housing from the non-luxury, Ratner will be forcing lower income residents into ghettos.
NoLandGrab: Assemblymember Roger Green, casually mentioned the possibility of moving the so-called affordable housing off site in his testimony at the ESDC hearing two weeks ago. Green has been an ardent Ratner supporter going back to when the project was first announced.
Posted by lumi at 4:22 PM
October 29, 2005
Ferrer Is Chided Over Atlantic Yards
So the New York Times sort of covered Ferrer's press conference at the Atlantic Yards yesterday, where he publicly called for a halt to the project.
"Recently it's come to light that this proposal is not what we all thought it would be," Mr. Ferrer said. "Along with my concerns about infrastructure and total lack of community participation it's clear that this project just cannot go forward as it's currently structured."
Read the Times article here if you wish, but run don't walk over to TimesRatnerReport's uncoverage of the coverage.
Ferrer, Sharpton, and the Journalism of Verification
So Democratic Mayoral candidate Freddy Ferrer held a press conference yesterday in which he made his most forceful statement in opposition to the Atlantic Yards project, offering specific criticisms about the amount of affordable housing, the lack of community review, and the prospect of "nearly a billion dollars" (actually, more, according to the developer--see Chapter 3 of my report) in subsidies. But the lead in all the coverage is that the Rev. Al Sharpton disagrees with him, with no effort to factcheck Sharpton.
The Daily News also jumped in on the action, with a weird summary of yesterday's campaign events: Freddy gets slap from his pal Rev. Al
Posted by amy at 10:23 AM
Ratner picks Philly firm for mega-project
From the Brooklyn Papers:
The announcement came during an Oct. 25 gathering at the House of the Lord Church in Boerum Hill organized by the Community Benefits Agreement Coalition and attended by Rev. Herbert Daughtry, who heads the coalition, Assemblyman Roger Green, and Forest City Ratner executives.Absent from the event was Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development (BUILD), whose vice president, Marie Louis, first announced McKissack & McKissack’s participation in the project at a May 2005 meeting on the steps of Borough Hall.
After publicly denying being on the developer’s payroll, Louis has conceded receiving a salary of $100,000. BUILD’s non-profit tax filings report a $5-million donation from Forest City.
Posted by amy at 10:18 AM
Mattera Qualifies for Matching Funds in Run for Brooklyn Borough President
Green Party Press Release:
"I am proud to be the first Green Party candidate eligible for matching funds for this office," said Mattera. "This demonstrates tremendous support for our campaign from city residents who are tired of watching Marty Markowitz act as a doormat for Bruce Ratner and other developers who want to take over our city. The Campaign Finance Program levels the playing field for candidates such as myself who do not accept corporate campaign contributions, and is a wonderful tool in support of grass roots democracy."
Posted by amy at 10:12 AM
TODAY: Fans For Fair Play, Scott Turner on WLIB
Scott Turner from Fans For Fair Play on
"Sports Blues with Larry Hardesty"
WLIB, 1190 AM
Topic, The Ratner disaster and his misuse of sports to grease the project's skids.
Turner will be on at 2:15PM.
Posted by lumi at 10:07 AM
October 28, 2005
Ferrer expresses concerns in showndown with GIANT RAT!
In an ironic bit of street theater, Ratner sent union guys, who showed up with a giant Rat, to shout down mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer during his press conference in Brooklyn highlighting his deep concerns about Ratner's Atlantic Yards Plan.
Posted by lumi at 7:54 PM
Ferrer, Then Marty, Speak Out Against Yards' Scale
Brownstoner reports that after Ferrer took a stand against Ratner's plan in his discussion with the Daily News editorial board, Marty followed. This isn't exactly acurate, Marty has been saying for months that "bulk is in play, " and his first public cries for a reduction in size came as early as late September.
Check out the post for a lively discussion in the comments section.
Posted by lumi at 7:22 PM
Urban Blight
It's true, the neighborhood is blighted and we've got the photographic evidence to prove it!
Copies of BS 2.0, were dumped on the corner of Atlantic and 6th Ave., gratis a Ratner/BUILD distribution machine, across the street from the Worst Mall in America.
Posted by lumi at 8:53 AM
Beep's downsize call
NY Daily News
by Hugh Son
Markowitz told the Daily News that benefits from the $3.5 billion project such as jobs, affordable housing and park space should be preserved while building heights are reduced.
"The urban design challenge is how do we [preserve] the benefits and downscale the heights of the buildings proposed," Markowitz said.
...
"I'm confident that there will be modification in the original proposal," Markowitz said yesterday. "There has to be - there will be."
The TimesRatnerReport makes an interesting point.
* The project has been ENLARGED since it was originally announced in Dec., 2003.
* Downsizing of the current plan by 10% would NOT even get the project back to its original size.
NoLandGrab: There's no mention of downscaling the use of eminent domain and no specific proposal.
Does anyone think that this is just a publicity stunt, engineered by Ratner's PR team, to give cover to politicians like Marty and Yassky who can claim a "win-win" for the community without hardly lifting a finger?
Posted by lumi at 8:30 AM
All good news all the time
NY Press
by Azi Paybarah
The Press covers Newark's unabashed efforts to pay for good news, turns its attention to the gold standard of PR rags...
Before getting too uppity about wacky Newark Mayor Sharpe James and the gang across the river, though, let's pay tribute to our own agit-prop rag, the occasionally-printed Brooklyn Standard (again, no italics warranted), which is dedicated to providing in-depth coverage to the superb efforts of their benevolent parent company, Forest City Ratner, to build a stadium in the borough.
... and then takes a swipe at the NY Times's "warm, fuzzy stories" on the Ratner deal, suggesting, "Perhaps they could use the Brooklyn Standard as a wire source."
Posted by lumi at 8:18 AM
Pombo, Resources Committee Members Vow to Protect Private Property
Press release from the Office of House Resources Committee
"The Court set a precedent that will haunt the American people for decades to come," [House Resources Committee Chairman Richard W.] Pombo (R-CA) continued. "Invoking eminent domain should be an extremely rare occurrence in this country and for a very clearly defined public use."
Congress is fast-tracking legislation that would cut off federal economic development funding for state and local governments that consider actions under Kelo.
Posted by lumi at 8:17 AM
Eminent Domain and the Laws of Motion
While we are on the subject of polling, here's an the latest blog entry from eminent domain lawyer and blogger Bill Ward about recent polls surveying opinions of Jerseyites on emient domain and what has been dubbed, the "Kelo effect."
Posted by lumi at 7:47 AM
October 27, 2005
Daily News: Letter to the editor (Published)
More letters from Brooklynites were published in today's Daily News in response to Monday's Daily New editorial screed.
Crying foul ...
Brooklyn: The editorial on the Nets arena proposal ("A neighborhood
grows in Brooklyn," Oct. 24) fails to acknowledge that opposition to
the project dates to 2003, when it was made public. A project of this
size causes problems that can cost the city and state huge sums of
money. Bruce Ratner's company assumes no financial ability if it
fails. The opponents are fighting for the people of the whole state.
Steve Hart
... over stadium
Brooklyn: Re "A neighborhood grows in Brooklyn": A neighborhood
already exists in Brooklyn. In fact, many neighborhoods exist in
Brooklyn. The people you disparage love and respect Brooklyn
neighborhoods and their neighbors. They are fighting to save civil
rights: the right to own property, the right to freedom of speech and
the right to a democratic process.
Annette Bombarger
Posted by lumi at 10:17 AM
Freddy fires Net salvo
He'd downsize 'mother of all real estate deals'
The Daily News
by Michael Saul
Ferrer told the [Daily News] Editorial Board that he supported the project's affordable housing and other benefits it would bring to the community, but he lambasted the overall "secrecy and lack of transparency" surrounding the development.
He also rebuked what he called "apparent abuses of eminent domain," citing a secret memo that recently emerged about two businesses that could be evicted if a site were not made available by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
TimesRatnerReport analyses the article, wondering about the "secret memo" and how can Ferrer justify eminent domain for "underperforming" businesses.
Posted by lumi at 9:47 AM
Observer Poll: Nets Stadium Gets Nod From Brooklynites
The NY Observer
by Matthew Schuermann
The NY Observer, WNYC and WCBS commissioned Pace University to conduct a poll of 538 likely voters, which included questions surveying their opinions on the proposed Nets Arena and 16 highrise towers (results on page 21 & 22).
The survey concludes that there is a low level of public awareness, but generally found that respondents were in favor of the project.
Asked outright what they think about the plan, 39 percent of the 538 voters polled said they support it, 23 percent oppose it, and the rest were undecided. Support was even stronger among Brooklynites (50 percent) and black men (59 percent). A set of follow-up questions gave the best arguments in favor (jobs, housing, civic spirit) and against (the large size, a $200 million taxpayer subsidy, use of eminent domain) and then asked respondents to rate their support: 46 percent were somewhat or strongly for it.
Between 30 percent and 36 percent of the public opposed it, depending on how the question was worded.
Asked to comment on the survey:
FCRC Exec. VP Jim Stuckey was pleased, "that people in Brooklyn have obviously been paying attention and understand the concept and the issue."
Assemblywoman Joan Millman recalled when she, "was at a Christmas party in Sheepshead Bay and the question was asked, and everybody was for it. That’s because they don’t have to live with it.”
DDDb's Dan Goldstein noted, "considering that the developer is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, on lobbying and on public relations, including two newspapers—and grassroots activists just can’t match that—the results are pretty good.”
Check out TimesRatnerReport for an analysis of the poll. Norman Oder brings up some good points, including the fact that there was no mention to the respondents that the arena would be the most expensive EVER built.
NoLandGrab: In order to survey how the opinion of respondents might change as they learned more about the project, the sample was broken up into groups to be polled separately on arguments "for" and "against" the project.
Despite what The Observer article claims, respondents were never specifically asked about "eminent domain" or "taking of private property." One of the arguments "against" the project included "evicting residents," however this is not the same thing as eminent domain, the highest profile issue to come out of the US Supreme Court this year.
All in all, the main conclusions that can be drawn from the survey is that most New Yorkers don't care about a project not in their backyard, Forest City Ratner's money has done a great job of framing the public debate with those who do, and that Marty will probably go back to saying that "Brooklynites are for the arena" again.
Posted by lumi at 8:07 AM
Ratner Reveals Details of Unprecedented $182 Million Rail Yard Move
The Brooklyn Daily Eagle
by Raanan Geberer
The contract for rennovation of the MTA railyards was awarded to African American-owned contstuction firm, McKissack and McKissack. McKissack also holds the $700K contract to complete the pre-construction phase of the project.
The press conference was held at Rev. Daughtry's House of the Lord Church. Rev. Daghtry and Assemblyman Roger Green tied the event to the passing of Rosa Parks, a civil rights icon who, during her life was sensitive about being tied to everyone's message.
McKissack has previous experience with railroad projects and describes itself as the oldest minority-owned professional design and construction firm in the nation.
NoLandGrab: FCRC is touting a win-win-win for African Americans, the MTA and FCRC meanwhile the MTA never requested these renovations.
Posted by lumi at 7:08 AM
October 26, 2005
Daily News: Letter to the editor (Published)
Daily News
Letters
Not NIMBY
Brooklyn: Brooklyn residents are to be applauded, not slammed, for fulfilling their civic responsibility of looking at the many environmental issues that need to be weighed in the enormous Atlantic Yards project ("A neighborhood grows in Brooklyn," editorial, Oct. 24). This is not a case of NIMBY (and name-calling isn't nice), but a state-mandated review that rightly insists on citizen participation.
Lucy Koteen
Posted by lumi at 8:22 PM
BROOKLYN: BUILDER NAMED FOR ATLANTIC YARDS [again?!]
The NY Times, Metro Brief
by Nick Confessore
The real estate developer Forest City Ratner Companies announced yesterday that McKissack & McKissack, the country's oldest black-owned construction firm, would manage a planned $182 million renovation of the Atlantic Yards rail depot in Brooklyn. The renovation of the century-old railyards is the first major stage of the $3.5 billion development that Forest City Ratner has proposed. Supporters of the development said the selection of McKissack & McKissack was evidence that the developer was keeping its promise to hire contracting firms owned by minorities and women whenever possible. Critics have said that they hope to block the development.
NoLandGrab: Readers may remember that McKissack & McKissack was named as the builder last May by Marie Louis of BUILD.
The difference between the two annoucements is that Marie Louis's comments in May concerned the management of the pre-construction portion of the project, while yesterday's announcement was regarding the renovation of the railyards.
Posted by lumi at 10:55 AM
Ad for Air Rights at Arena-Area Building Raises New Questions
The Brooklyn Daily Eagle reports on intrigue in the real estate world concerning a property in the Ratner footprint. Article by Raanan Geberer.
An large ad in Friday’s New York Sun, concerning an unusual building that falls within the footprint of Forest City Ratner’s planed Atlantic Yards development, raises more questions than it answers.
The ad, on page RE-9, reads, “Brooklyn, Atlantic Yards Area, 24 Sixth Ave., Air Rights Easement, Covers and Controls Forest City Ratner Companies Development. All Offers Considered.” ... Lupe Todd, a spokeswoman for Forest City Ratner, said that the real estate firm has run the ad before, and added that Forest City Ratner “needs that air right” to develop the project. Still, she said she was “not sure what [Helmsley-Spear’s] motives are.”
Posted by lumi at 9:22 AM
Letter to the Editor: Daily News
Here's another letter to the editor in response to the Daily News Editorial that characterized Brooklynites concerned about Ratner's plans as "NIMBY-ites."
To The Editors:
I was apalled to read your editorial categorizing all opponents of Atlantic Yards as "NIMBY-ites" and "anti-development complainers". Most Brooklynites would warmly welcome a sensible development plan for Atlantic Yards - one that integrates with instead of slicing through the surrounding neighborhoods, and one that is approved through a transparent public process and not back-room deals with one cherry-picked developer.
The Boerum Hill Association has always welcomed development that makes sense, and has enthusiastically supported numerous development projects in our Brooklyn neighborhood. To claim that anyone who opposes this particular project is simply anti-development betrays an ignorance of the facts. Until Forest City Ratner shows the slightest interest in working with the surrounding neighborhoods, studying and addressing the enormous environmental impacts, and addressing who (if anyone) will pay for the massive infrastructure increases this project will require, we oppose THIS development, and we don't want THIS in our backyards.
Sincerely,
Joel Potischman
Vice President
Boerum Hill Association
NoLandGrab: Just a hunch, but this project would likely never be sited in Publisher Mort Zuckerman's backyard since his neighbor Mike Bloomberg is already on record stating that he would not support such a move.
Posted by lumi at 9:12 AM
City Invokes Eminent Domain To Claim Stadium Site
AP, via ABC 7 News
DC did the deed, they filed papers to condemn properties for a new ballpark for the Washington Nationals.
NoLandGrab: Since the property valuations have been considered to be low for property in that area, it’s not certain whether or not property owners are holding out for a fair deal or as a matter of principle
Posted by lumi at 9:01 AM
New York Times Building Aims to Be Steel Landmark
McGraw Hill Construction
by Alex Padalka
An article about the engineering and construction innovations for the eminent-domain-addicted Bruce Ratner's existing monument to government taking for private enterprise.
Or, more plainly put, what's going on with the new NY Times headquarters.
Posted by lumi at 8:48 AM
To Publicize Its Good News, Newark Makes Deal With a Newspaper
The NY Times
by Jeffrey Gettleman
Why print your own paper like Brooklyn Standard Second Edition (BS 2.0) when you can just pay the media to print your stories:
Mayor Sharpe James and the City Council of Newark have devised a new way to get their message across: paying a weekly paper $100,000 to print "good news" about themselves and their city.
Posted by lumi at 8:18 AM
TimesRatnerReport Correction: Bloomberg's 'retouched' press release vs. the governor/ESDC
TimesRatnerReport
Oder smelled a rat, and erroneously jumped to the conclusion that Bloomberg retouched a press release. Now he has posted a correction, but still questions the use of different jobs, housing and economic benifit figures released to great fanfare by the City, State and Borough President's office back in March.
Posted by lumi at 8:14 AM
October 25, 2005
Times correction (TimesRatnerReport)
Behind today's New York Times correction on the location of a new Brooklyn railyard
The NY Times took their own sweet time (over a month) to print a correction brought up by Brooklyn gadfly, Norman Oder.
Posted by lumi at 12:31 PM
Times correction (Print Edition only)
Correction from The NY Times regarding Councilmember David Yassky's position:
"An article on Thursday about opposition to the Atlantic Yards development project in Brooklyn referred incompletely to the position of Councilman David Yassky. While the project's developer, Bruce C. Ratner, indeed solicited his support early on, Mr. Yassky said he was withholding it until his concerns were addressed."
Compare the correction to what was reported:
On Wednesday, "The crowd was impatient with those who seemed to have not yet made up their minds. Councilman David Yassky of Brooklyn, who has expressed cautious support for the project, said, 'If done right, the benefits will outweigh the costs.' But he added that it was 'out of scale' and would 'change irretrievably and irreversibly the character of the surrounding neighborhoods.'
"That prompted one audience member to yell out, 'Are you for the project or against it?'
"Mr. Yassky repeated that he was for the project if it was 'done right.'"
On Thursday, "In some respects, Mr. Ratner beat his opponents to the punch, taking care in the project's early days to line up support from community leaders and elected officials beyond the footprint. They include Councilmen David Yassky and Bill de Blasio, who represent most of the neighborhoods to the west of Flatbush Avenue, as well Marty Markowitz, the borough president."
NoLandGrab: We still maintain that Yassky is FOR the project, but not before he is AGAINST it.
We predict that Gehry has been working on a downscaled version of the project (why else would the model that was unveiled this summer be so incomplete?) that will be rolled out in the next couple of months, containing a few bollards and traffic calming initiatives. "Qualified" supporters will then declare "VICTORY" for the community, while taking credit for themselves.
Meanwhile, eminent domain, street closings and taxpayer funding will still be on the table and the traffic congestion band-aid and downsized-but-still-hugemongous project will remain a scourge on Brooklyn.
Posted by lumi at 12:01 PM
Re-Imagining Brooklyn's Inner Core: Atlantic Yards and Brooklyn Bridge Park
Project for Public Spaces
A NLG must read, that proposes a positive vision for Brooklyn, while promoting critical thinking about current proposals.
This essay addresses two major projects that are now in the works--Brooklyn Bridge Park and the Atlantic Yards development--that present a once-in-a-lifetime chance to re-shape Brooklyn's inner core around a truly vibrant public realm. As currently envisioned, both of these projects will be tragic missed opportunities, because they are not designed as compelling places that people will enjoy using.
NoLandGrab: Thanks to Brownstoner this article is making the rounds again.
Posted by lumi at 10:53 AM
ED roundup
Eminent domain headlines from the day's news:
The American Thinker, Why Bad Careers Happen to Good Justices
Justice Thomas's Kelo dissent opinion is held up as an example of Originalism on the High Court sought by Conservatives.
DCist, Property Owners Refuse to Sell Land
Property owners in the footprint of the DC's plan for a new ballpark for the MLB's Washington Nationals claim the City is lowballing property valuations.
The Day, Throwing Bombs At Fort Trumbull
Beleagured Ft. Trumbull homeowners who have taken their case to the US Supreme Court owe about $1 MILLION/each in back rent to the City of New London.
Posted by lumi at 9:20 AM
October 24, 2005
Letter to the Editor: Daily News
To the Editor,
I am one of those Brooklynites you falsely mischaracterize as a "not-in-my-backyard" "complainer" in your editorial of October 24th, entitled "A Neighborhood Grows in Brooklyn."
I, along with scores of concerned Brooklyn residents, provided thoughtful and well-researched testimony in a forum mandated by state law. The hearing lasted hours longer than planned because the Empire State Development Corporation's draft scoping document was woefully incomplete.
No one who testified at the hearing is "anti-development." Rather, we favor development that respects existing neighborhoods, doesn't rely on the abuse of eminent domain to transfer property to another "better" private owner, doesn't cheat the taxpayers, creates careers rather than dead-end jobs, and provides truly affordable housing rather than luxury condominiums.
And let me make one more thing perfectly clear: I wouldn't wish this project on anyone's backyard, let alone my own. Perhaps the Daily News's publisher, a billionaire real estate developer himself (surprise!), would like it in his?
Eric McClure
Brooklyn, NY
Posted by lumi at 9:47 PM
Letter to the Editor: Daily News
To the editor:
Your Oct. 24 editorial ("A Neighborhood Grows in Brooklyn") criticizes Brooklynites for commenting on the proposed $3.5 billion Atlantic Yards project at a state-mandated public hearing, the first of only two for this project. We offered our comments in good faith, not to stop the project, but to make this project work for Brooklyn. To dismiss as "NIMBY" anyone who criticizes the project reflects a gross misunderstanding of the state's environmental review process. If no one is allowed to criticize the project, then why bother with hearings at all?
-David Alquist, Secretary
Park Slope Civic Council
Posted by lumi at 9:16 PM
A neighborhood grows in Brooklyn
This Daily News editorial screed rachets up the rhetoric, condemning Brooklynites who expressed their concerns at last week's hearings, calling them NIMBY-ites. Cheering the slow steady mark of progress, board cites the "innovative" "community" benefits agreement as a reason for their support.
Thank goodness for responsible leaders, including Mayor Bloomberg and Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, who aren't letting the NIMBY-ites slow the progress on Atlantic Yards.
...
Despite the predictable howls from anti-development complainers, the interminable delays that have hobbled other big development projects - notably Ground Zero and the West Side of Manhattan - seem blessedly absent from the Brooklyn project.That's the best news we've heard in a while.
NoLandGrab: The mandatory hearing's purpose was to submit comments on the Scope of the Environmental Impact of the project, as was not a pep rally for or against the project as proponents and the Daily News seems to believe. Many of the groups who submitted comments and concerns have not taken a stand on the project, but all these groups are working together to make sure that concerns of the entire community, not just handpicked groups receiving finanacial support from Ratner, are addressed.
The editorial is also riddled with mistakes, such as the number of housing units, the details of the CBA and how much land Ratner controls.
Posted by lumi at 10:18 AM
Factchecking the Daily News editorial on Atlantic Yards
The fact-checking machine at TimesRatnerReport corrects the mistakes and erroneous stats in the Daily News editorial and reminds the board to read its own reports.
Posted by lumi at 10:04 AM
Daily News scoffs at Scary Gehry warnings, and misses the point
The Daily News editorial board attacked "the bizarre notion" that Gehry's Disney Hall neighborhood-heating debacle could happen at Atlantic Yards, a point I brought up as a member of Park Slope Civic Council, a group that is far from NIMBY-istic, and still has yet to take a stand on the project.
The board failed to understand that Gehry's experimental forms have often been deemed environmental hazards in themselves. The Draft Scope Environmental Impact hearing was just the place to make that point.
THE CASE OF CASE WESTERN
Consider Case Western Reserve University's Gehry project. In the winter of 2003 students and faculty found the building to be downright dangerous.
From the an Associated Press report:
In its first winter, snow and ice have been sliding off the long, sloping stainless-steel roof, bombarding the sidewalk below. And in bright sun, the glint off the steel tiles is so powerful that standing next to the building is like lying on a beach with a tanning mirror.
''You might have to walk on the road to make sure you don't get hit by ice,'' said Adam Searl, a junior at Case Western's Weatherhead School of Management. ''Maybe they should have thought about it before they had built the building. It's Cleveland. We get ice. We get snow. We get rain.''
That's falling chunks of ice and sliding snow, plus the tanning-mirror effect in "sun-drenched(?)" Cleveland. Could it happen here?
ARCHITECTURE FOR ART'S SAKE
Gehry's emphasis on experimental "forms" flirts with the arrogant notion of "architecture for art's sake," a dangerous precedent that ignores people and environment, things that used to be foundation principles of architecture.
THE BIG QUESTION
Should master builder of unintended consequences Frank Gehry be allowed to experiment on skyscrapers, highrises and a glass arena in the heart of Brooklyn? In the very least, the environmental impacts of his architecture should be anticipated and scrutinized.
— Lumi Michelle Rolley
Not-In-Anybody's-Backyard-Unless-Without-Eminent-Domain-Taxpayer-Subsidzied-
Arena-On-A-smaller-Scale-And-Through-ULURP-With-Real-Community-Input-And-
a-Proven-Masterbuilder
(NIABUWEDTSAONASSATULURPWRCIAPM)
Posted by lumi at 7:27 AM
October 23, 2005
Press Conference: REFORM CITY LANDMARK POLICY NOW
REFORM CITY LANDMARK POLICY NOW
Enact Intro 317 “ The Demolition Delay Bill” of Councilmen Mike McMahon of S.I.
The Four Borough Neighborhood Preservation Alliance and The Duffield Street Block Association present:
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 23rd
2 PM
233 DUFFIELD STREET IN DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN
A press conference to expose the Bloomberg administrations biased policy against Landmarking buildings in the outer boroughs. Calling for the passing of the Demolition Delay Bill.
The press conference will be attended by Council Members Charles Barron and Letitia James, State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, Dr. Richard Green, Jacob Morris, speakers include Joy Chatell, Lewis Greenstein and Bob Furman and supporting community groups and members of The Four Borough Neighborhood Preservation Alliance which is fighting to save our neighborhoods from greedy developers.
Brooklyn history is in danger of extinction. The Graving Dock of Red Hook and The Six homes on Duffield Street are targeted for destruction. Both examples pushed by Bloombergs Department of City Planning. Why was the call for landmarking the Dock ignored? it qualifies for the National Register.
The Duffield Street homes are believed to part of the Underground Railroad, they were built in the 1840's. The Brooklyn chapter of The Municipal Arts Society believe 233 Duffield Street and The Graving Dock worthy of being saved. Does Bloomberg think black history less important than real estate deals? Why must Councilmen Barron continue to work to give the Duffield seven a fair process regarding the hiring of an oral historian.
IT'S TIME FOR REFORM NOW
A bill submitted to City Council (Intro 317) by Mike Mcmahon to require the Landmarks Commission to evaluate a building 50 years or older for Landmark status when a demolition permit is submitted. The Four Borough Neighborhood Preservation Alliance supports this bill.
Posted by amy at 1:56 PM
NOTES ON A NEW YORK SCORECARD (R.I.P. ALLAN MALAMUD) -- A GUARANTEED SEX-FREE POST #69
From Kelso's Nuts:
And at the nexus of basketball, education, and Jews that aren't fun, we have Bruce Ratner, Mayor Bloomberg, and schools chancellor Joel Klein. Want to earl? Take a look at Klein's hideous face someday. Ok, here's where it all fits together in a nice package. Bloomberg and Klein (and Levy before him: not as ugly but just as mean) have no problem cutting holy hell out of the public schools budget, but are pleased as punch to offer Ratner all sorts of incentives to build his Brooklyn arena and mall. Make no mistake about this, Kelso is a capitalist. He respects anyone with the brains and balls to make bundles, but not on the public dole and not at the cost of Kelso's child's education, when Kelso is paying ALL his taxes. Kelso couldn't give a shit if the Nets play in New Jersey or Brooklyn, but he wants his son to have the full complement of after-school activities from theater arts (now gone as of Sept 2005) to all sports. So, the privatization fantasy marches on, this time through the back door, as the Kelsos of the world have to write five-figure checks to their local public schools and toss around hundred dollar bills at bake sales so the Bruce Ratners of the world can get even richer and more self-important and build even bigger, more vulgar waterfront property in Bridgehampton.
Posted by amy at 1:07 PM
NIMBY Update
From Tony Fletcher's iJamming:
The proposed Forest City Ratner “arena” at Atlantic Yards is No Longer In My Backyard, but that doesn’t mean I’ve stopped caring about it. To be frank, this proposed mini-city in the midst of Brooklyn’s busiest intersection was a contributory factor in our decision to sell up and move out. Only one of many factors, mind, and I would never roll over and admit defeat just like that, but honestly and truly, if the project gets built to its current design, I’ll be happy I’m no longer living nearby to reap the undeserved punishment.
And NoLandGrab just can't resist the temptation to include this quote:
Such was the scale of discontent at Tuesday’s hearing that even Borough President Marty Markowitz, who instigated the very idea of a baseball arena in Brooklyn and has served these last two years less as a people’s representative than as public cheerleader for developer Bruce Ratner, was heard to say that the project needed “scaling back.” (Was that a pig flying over Atlantic Yards? No, just Marty’s hefty ego in free fall.)
Posted by amy at 1:00 PM
It came from the Blogosphere...
The Real Estate: BUILD gets a raise
TimesRatnerReport: "Modern blueprint"? Evidence points to increased BUILD/Ratner payments and collusion
Curbed: Atlantic Yards Brouhaha at City Tech
Field of Schemes: Nets arena gets noisy welcome
Daily Heights, 750 People Show Up For Atlantic Yards Public Hearing
Big Cities Big Boxes: Times Reports Widespread Opposition to Ratner's Atlantic Yards Project
Bag of Rocks: Save the Clock Tower
TrueHoop: Messy Doings in Brooklyn
Gurgly: Atlantic Canards
Stay Free!: Astroturf for Ratner
Brownstoner: BUILD Finally Fesses Up to Ratner Funding
Retire Mike Bloomberg: Bloomberg & Ratner Inc.
Posted by amy at 12:43 PM
Miers got windfall in land deal
Knight Ridder via Star-Telegram
by Jack Douglas Jr. and Stephen Henderson
This article should wake up property rights advocates:
Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers collected more than 10 times the market value for a small slice of family-owned land in a large Superfund pollution cleanup site in Dallas where the state wanted to build a highway off-ramp.
Mediation efforts in 2003 reduced the award from $106,915 to $80,915, but Miers, who controls the family's interest in the land, hasn't reimbursed the state for the $26,000 difference, even after Bush appointed her to the Supreme Court.
Though not typical of eminent domain cases, once again the politically connected are the beneficiaries of government takings. There's also a connection between Miers's lawfirm, and the judge that made appointments to the panel that determined condemnation payouts.
Can Americans come to any conclusion about Miers's views on eminent domain from this one case? Or, is she merely the worst kind of crony who will make a mockery of the bench?
NoLandGrab: Too bad DDDb spokesperson "Danny Boy" Goldstein doesn't know "Dubya," he coulda made bank.
Posted by lumi at 10:26 AM
October 22, 2005
Yassky flops at public hearing, attempts to set the record straight
After claiming that he is for the project, but not before he is against the project, City Councilmember David Yassky attempts to set the record straight on his position on Atlantic Yards in a press release:
Office of Council Member David Yassky
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Evan Thies, 917 715 9265NY Times Gets it Wrong --
Yassky Does Not Support Ratner Plan Without Major ChangesOctober 21, 2005 -- The New York Times erroneously reported yesterday that Council Member David Yassky supports the current plan by developer Bruce Ratner to redevelop Atlantic Yards. In a statement, Yassky rebuked the Times, saying that he is for housing, jobs and investment for Brooklyn at the site, but will not support the project until significant changes are made.
"I believe that a professional sports team has the potential to benefit Brooklynites, both as an amenity and by creating hundreds of job," Yassky said. "In addition to the arena, development at Atlantic Yards could also create much-needed housing and space for commercial development. However, there are many problems with the latest proposal. Chief among them is the scale of the project. I do not believe that Downtown and Brownstone Brooklyn can handle such out-of-scale development, nor do I believe that the current plan has adequately considered the impact on surrounding communities."
For more on Yassky's position, read his testimony from Tuesday's public hearing: http://www.davidyassky.com/show_issue.php?id=21&x=22&y=4
NoLandGrab: To be clear, the above link points to the written tesimony Councilmember Yassky submitted at Tuesday's hearing, not his oral comments. The distinction between the two seems to be that the Times reported that he was for the project provided it was done right, but really he is against the project, UNLESS it is done right.
Councilmember Yassky appears to be attempting to walk a fine line, neither too "for" nor too "against" the project as he susses out his chances for a congressional run in 2006.
Yassky, however, may be underestimating Brooklyn's voters. Given his constituents' deep-seated anger about the Atlantic Yards project, and the recent unraveling of Brooklyn's Democratic machine, it's likely that voters are ready for a candidate who is not afraid to take strong positions and act as an elected representative, rather than a politician.
Posted by lumi at 12:54 PM
Brooklyn Peace Fair
Develop Don't Destroy will have a table at the Brooklyn Parents For Peace Fair and will also run a workshop there at 3:30.
Brooklyn Peace Fair 2005
Saturday, October 22
11AM-5PM
YWCA
30 Third Ave. @ Atlantic Ave.
Subway: D, Q, 2, 3, 4, 5 to Atlantic Ave.
B, M, N, R to Pacific Street
A, C, G to Hoyt Schermerhorn.
Buses: B25, B26, B37, B38, B41, B45, B52, B63, B65, B67, and B103
The Brooklyn Peace Fair is FREE and open to the public. Children, teens, educators, and adults of all ages are welcome for a day of performances, workshops, children's activities! Dozens of peace and social justice groups will be on hand.
Keynote address, Cindy Sheehan (co-founder, Gold Star Families for Peace; mother of Casey, killed in Iraq)
Posted by lumi at 11:48 AM
Ratner exec admits funding supporters
From the Brooklyn Papers:
A top Forest City Ratner official for the first time this week acknowledged that the development company has been paying large sums of money to organizations offering what they’ve presented as grassroots neighborhood support for the proposed Atlantic Yards development.As reported by The Brooklyn Papers two weeks ago, Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development (BUILD) reported on its non-profit tax filings that it would receive $5 million from developer Bruce Ratner.
Posted by amy at 10:50 AM
Public packs Ratner meet
From the Brooklyn Papers:
Among the elected officials who testified, Brooklyn Heights-Park Slope Assemblywoman Joan Millman made her first public statement against the project.She cited the problems that 18,000 new residents could create for the borough’s sewer capacity, subway system, police and fire personnel, and postal service.
“Thus far I have yet to see a detailed and adequate plan that will address such concerns, and I am not convinced the Environmental Impact Statement will do so,” she said, while many of the project’s opponents clapped or whispered a surprised response at the Brownstone Brooklyn legislator’s position.
Posted by amy at 10:46 AM
More questions about the Brooklyn Standard: fake bylines?
Norman Oder finds more muck in the murky BS (Brooklyn Standard):
So, five days after I first reported that the Fall issue of the Brooklyn Standard, the Forest City Ratner tabloid "publication," put contributor Nate Schweber's name on two stories he didn't write, and significantly changed the two stories he did write, most other media outlets in town have ignored the story. They shouldn't. The questions go beyond the publication's dealings with Schweber, who for three years had freelanced for Manhattan Media, a publisher that otherwise publishes four community newspapers in Manhattan (and one glossy magazine, Avenue). Schweber says he was led to believe that the Standard was a community newspaper in Brooklyn.--Did Manhattan Media recruit other writers by telling them that they were writing for a community paper rather than a Ratner "publication"?
--If Schweber didn't write the front-page story attributed to him, who did?
--Who are Kim Last and Brigitte Labonte, the other two writers credited with front-page stories? Searches using both Lexis-Nexis and Google turn up no journalists with those names.
Posted by amy at 10:41 AM
Eminent Domain - the People Fight Back!
As the tide turns on acceptance of eminent domain, everyone from landowners to taxpayers to politicians is trying their hand at stopping the insanity...
Stadium Property Owners Balking: Property owners in the area of a proposed stadium in DC are starting to realize they've been offered a raw deal - "The city gave the 23 property owners on the site, near South Capitol Street and the Navy Yard in Southeast, until yesterday to accept offers that total $97 million. Only one owner agreed to sell."
Protests Against Eminent Domain Speak to Deeper Problem: Distrust - Kelo and New Orleans show how eminent domain abuse exhibits reverse Robin Hood syndrome: "There’s a deeper distrust at play here. Many opponents feel alienated from their elected leaders, and disenfranchised with respect to property rights. It’s not just that government can seize your property, it’s that government is taking it to benefit people who matter more — because they can pay more."
New London council reinstates development corporation: Although this is more backpedaling than victory, it shows that city councils CAN demand oversight of local projects:
In September, the development authority sent letters ordering some residents to vacate their houses.That angered Gov. M. Jodi Rell, who put pressure on the agency to rescind the letters. State officials had asked cities and towns to hold off on seizing property until the legislature had a chance to review the state's eminent domain laws.
The notices also enraged the City Council, and led to last Monday's vote to sever ties with the development corporation.
Posted by amy at 10:24 AM
Brooklyn Standard trashes Brooklyn
An alert reader spotted a Brooklyn Standard eyesore near Pratt:
"the entire street from myrtle to dekalb was covered in newspapers blowing in the wind, like someone had just randomly dumped like 500+ on the street outside of pratt."
Maybe Ratner and BUILD could sponsor a community clean up to pick up their litter, carbage and gray matter.
Posted by lumi at 9:48 AM
Condemnation practices under fire
The Journal News by Lan Maniace
From the coverage of the NY State Senate Eminent Domain hearings, a quote from an eminent domain supporter followed by a retort from DDDb's Dan Goldstein:
"Dissident property holders are rarely white knights altruistically seeking to hold on to the family homestead. In my experience, they are shrewd business people with distressed properties looking for economic advantage," said [Mark Weingarten, a White Plains attorney who has represented developers in Westchester and Rockland,].
A critic of eminent domain and a plan to build a sports arena and 17 high rises in Brooklyn took umbrage at use of the term "holdout" to describe people who want to remain in their homes and businesses.
"We don't call the condemning agencies interlopers, thieves or crooks. Until we start doing that, let's call the people what they are — people who are living in their homes," said Daniel Goldstein, spokesman for the group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn.
Posted by lumi at 1:31 AM
HR 3405
House bill HR 3405 is very anti-eminent domain. It would block ANY federal funding, even to community block grants, if properties were aquired by eminent domain and then given over to private commercial development.
However, it will go through Rep. Richard Pombo's (R-CA, Dist 11) Resource Committee and he is likely to stick on something predictable, probably involving weakening the Endangered Species Act.
Stated Purpose: To prohibit the provision of Federal economic development assistance for any State or locality that uses the power of eminent domain power to obtain property for private commercial development or that fails to pay relocation costs to persons displaced by use of the power of eminent domain for economic development purposes.
Posted by lumi at 1:19 AM
October 21, 2005
Tiffany Taps New Designer: Frank Gehry to Create Jewelry Collection for Tiffany & Co.
Frank Gehry, coming to a neck near you:
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 21, 2005--Tiffany & Co. (NYSE - TIF) today announced a new partnership with internationally renowned architect Frank Gehry, who will create an exclusive jewelry collection in collaboration with Tiffany to be introduced in April 2006. With this historic agreement, Gehry becomes the jeweler's newest designer to bring a bold and original dynamic to the worlds of fashion and design.
Gehry:
"Sculptors and painters have inspired me with their ability to make things with their own hands. This process led to the discovery of new ways to give feeling and spirit to form, and realize our shared vision of jewelry that provides a beautiful context for living now."
NoLandGrab: OK, this doesn't have much to do with Brooklyn, but it contains a cautionary tale.
Gehry's emphasis on "form" is the chief complaint about his work. His projects cast aside centuries of common sense and have little consideration of people and their environment. Who else would create buildings that raise temperatures in LA, spark dangerous avalanches in Ohio, never mind the acres of uninviting, even dangerous, Gehry open spaces across the world (i.e. Bilbao, Cambridge, Seattle).
Should the environmental impacts of Frank Gehry be considered in the evaluation of the Atlantic Yards project? Tell us what you think. Email: scarygehry@nolandgrab.org.
Posted by lumi at 8:56 AM
Filthy Weasels
A Brooklyn Standard sighting from Gumby Fresh gives new meaning to "pulp fiction":
But we were taking the 2 train with Cutesome to work, and noticed this weird dried gray paste all over the northern entrance to the Bergen Street Station. "What was it?", we asked. "Oh," said Cutesome, "it was all of those free papers they were handing out the other day. They just dumped them down there and the rain turned them to pulp."
Posted by lumi at 8:30 AM
DDDb's Goldstein testifies before NY State Senate Committee
Dan Goldstein posted his testimony before the State Senate Committee on Commerce, Economic Development and Small Business on the DDDb web site.
The project proposes the use of eminent domain for about 53 buildings. It would displace around 800 people and 35 businesses. Wielding the threat of eminent domain Mr. Ratner has bought out many residents and some businesses, but many still remain and will challenge condemnation when the time comes.
For nearly two years an entire neighborhood has lived under the threat of eminent domain without the state or city even having the decency to outline a timeline or explain the law to homeowners, business owners and tenants in the Ratner footprint; people and places such as Vince Bruns the fish monger who lives in an irreplaceable converted factory loft he's worked for decades to own, or Hector Gonzalez whose family has lived on my block for 60 years, or Freddy's pre-prohibition era bar (and community center), or Johnny "Seatcovers" a senior citizen who has lived on his quiet block for 40 years, or the newly renovated roofer's union headquarters around the corner from me and on and on.
Goldstein goes on to tell the story of Simon Liu, whose family was displaced by the government in China and now, faces the same fate on these shores.
The testimony ends with an appeal to the State legislature to reform the definition of "blight:"
In most cases where blight is claimed to justify eminent domain, it's a bogus claim.
Posted by lumi at 8:25 AM
New London to rescind vote to sever ties with NLDC
AP, via Newsday
by Susan Hatch
This week's unthinkable event in New London may be impossible:
Under pressure from the state, New London officials said Thursday they will rescind this week's vote to sever ties with the quasi-public development authority at the center of a national debate over eminent domain powers.
Posted by lumi at 8:20 AM
Existing State Law Protects Property Owners, Experts Say
NY Law Journal
Both sides of the eminent domain debate are being heard by NY State lawmakers.
ALBANY — Legislative proposals to reform eminent domain law in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial Kelo v. City of New London decision are unnecessary, as New York already protects private property owners from government condemnation, experts told a state Senate panel yesterday.
New York City Corporation Counsel Michael A. Cardozo and Patricia E. Salkin, associate dean and director of the Albany Law School Government Law Center, said yesterday the Court's decision that private property can be taken from one owner and transferred to another for economic development purposes has no impact in this state. However, both also said the eminent domain rule is ripe for thoughtful, considered review — as opposed to a knee-jerk reaction to Kelo.
Yesterday, a Senate committee held one in a series of statewide hearings to explore the potential impact of Kelo, and to compile testimony on what response, if any, is appropriate in New York.
Just last month, a group of senators led by John A. DeFrancisco, R-Syracuse, proposed a constitutional amendment to make clear that in New York "property shall not be taken from one owner and transferred to another, on the grounds that the public will benefit from a more profitable private use."
Other legislative proposals are also pending. (See column on page 5 of today's Law Journal by John R. Nolon and Jessica A. Bacher describing remedial legislation both in Congress and the state Legislature).
Mr. Cardozo said those fears are unfounded since New York law already bars condemnation for economic development purposes unless the area in question is blighted or in danger of becoming a "substandard or insanitary area" likely to negatively impact the municipality.
"To place additional limits on the eminent domain power beyond those already contained in New York State and New York City law could cripple development in this state and hamper vital economic growth," Mr. Cardozo told Senator James Alesi, R-Monroe County, sponsor of yesterday's hearing, and Senators Elizabeth O. Little, R-Glens Falls, and James W. Wright, R-Watertown.
Mr. Cardozo said that without the power of eminent domain, and the restrained use of that power, the city would not have Lincoln Center on the Upper West Side or the Metrotech development near the Brooklyn Bridge, and Times Square would have remained the crime-infested "national showcase for urban decay and blight" that it was in the 1970s.
Ms. Little repeatedly asked about the scope and definition of "blight," implying that it may be too broad. Mr. Alesi also expressed concern that property can be taken for market value, a figure that may not accurately reflect its worth.
"I want to emphasize that New York City uses eminent domain sparingly," Mr. Cardozo said. "Still, the power of eminent domain is vital to the social and economic well-being of New York City and the entire state."
Ms. Salkin, an authority on land use regulation, decried the "unfortunate hysteria" sparked by Kelo and cautioned that it essentially means nothing in New York. She said that while the state is looking at eminent domain in a Kelo context, it should shift its focus and examine compensation levels, notice requirements and master development plan principles as those items relate to condemnation law.
But John Lincoln, a dairy farmer from Ontario County and president of the New York Farm Bureau, disagreed.
"I can assure you we will be using our resources to support legislation protecting landowners from municipal use of eminent domain to enhance economic development," he said. "The citizens of the state of New York are very upset about the Supreme Court decision. The Kelo decision changes the game dramatically. . . . Now private property can effectively be taken by a public entity for the profit of other private parties. . . . After Kelo, no property is safe. Any property can be seized and transferred to the highest bidder."
Mr. Lincoln and others in the agricultural community fear New York's current law does little to protect them against Kelo. For instance, farmers say it is conceivable that a municipality would target a farm with a dilapidated barn and acres of virgin land, using the rundown building as an excuse to condemn under the "blighted" provision and transfer ownership to a Wal-Mart or other commercial interest that would pay far more in local taxes.
Additional hearings are scheduled for today at Suffolk County Community College, Thursday at the Theodore D. Young Community Center in White Plains and Oct. 27 at City Hall Commons in Syracuse.
Posted by lumi at 7:47 AM
"Reality sets in" and "Buying love"
Crain's Cleveland Business Online
Editor's Choice
by Jeff Stacklin
The hometown business trade publication of Bruce's mothership, Forest City Enterprises, noted yesterday's NY Times and NY Post coverage of the opposition to Atlantic Yards and the revelation that Ratner has paid thousands of dollars to "community" "grassroots" organizations.
Posted by lumi at 7:37 AM
CU’s Expansion Plan Comes Under Fire at Forum
Columbia Spectator
by Lydia DePillis
Here's an article we missed during all the hearing hoopla:
A panel of community activists and business owners blasted Columbia’s possible use of eminent domain in Manhattanville yesterday, addressing a standing-room-only crowd at a forum hosted by the Municipal Art Society in Midtown.
Posted by lumi at 6:37 AM
"Lose Your House" by Eminem Domain
(speaking)
Look...
If you had one shot
One opportunity
To seize everything you ever wanted
Through eminent domain
Would you grab it?
Or just let it slip?
Yo...
In New London ... in Connectikitty
Homeowners are weak, but City Hall is heavy
And it can taste increased tax revenue already
And that's gotta be better for the public benefitty
The State's right to seize propitty
Goes back to King John
Until the Magna Carta barons wrote some restrictions down
But that old crowd, now, it ain't so loud, wow
Civic progress is chokin'! Your rights need to be broken -- now!
The clock's run out! Time's up! Over! Blaow!
today's reality, might as well fight gravity
Oh, there goes Sue Kelo, she's
Stoked, she's so mad, but she
Won't give up that easy
No, she won't have it
Her ol' back's to the ropes
It don't matter, poor dope
She knows that, 'cuz she's broke
The deck's so stacked, and she knows it
Might as well move to a mobile home
And stop givin' her crap to the guvamint, yo
This whole "rights" shit
We can capture your home, shit, and it's legal! Sic passim!
(chorus)
You're gonna...
Lose your house! Face the music! You've blown it!
You think you "own" it, but you better let it go, go!
You only get one shot -- now the city needs its chance to grow
So with impunity, we can fuck your life up, yo...
(speaking)
We can grab anything we take a shine to, man...
Posted by Stevo Darkly, 02/26/05, http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/02/newatreason_437.shtml
Posted by lumi at 12:05 AM
October 20, 2005
Property rights at stake
The Times Union
by Elizabeth Benjamin
But at a hearing in Albany on Tuesday, [Sen. James Alesi, R-Perinto,] said it appears the Legislature should at least more sharply define the definition of a blighted area, which under current law is the only property that can be taken for private development.
"If nothing else, we at least want to visit a legislative definition of that word," said Alesi, who was joined at the hearing by Sens. Elizabeth Little, R-Queensbury, and James Wright, R-Watertown.
Posted by lumi at 11:29 PM
Bronx cheers for Brooklyn arena
The Bergen Record
by John Brennan
The noisy crowd of at least 700 inside the New York Tech auditorium made the hearing seem at times almost like a ballgame - with some speakers being interrupted by loud cheers or equally emphatic Bronx cheers. Many of the project's backers, including labor union members, were as supportive of the plan as others were critical.
Posted by lumi at 11:24 PM
The Times follows up on project opposition, but misses some angles
TimesRatnerReport analyzes today's Times story:
It's chancy to consider the significant presence of middle- and upper-class Brownstone Brooklynites--many part of community boards and civic groups charged to address the project's impact--a referendum on the project. Similarly, the press shouldn't have made too much of the predominance of Ratner supporters at previous events. What if, on Tuesday, the two dozen union members had all signed up to testify? What if BUILD and ACORN decided to bring groups of supporters, as they did for a November 2004 hearing in the same venue?
Posted by lumi at 11:11 PM
U.S. House Considers Eminent Domain Reform
This from the Institue of Justice:
Dear Friends,
Very soon, the House Committee on the Judiciary will mark-up H.R. 3135, Congressman Sensenbrenner's "Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005." This bill would respond to Kelo by withdrawing federal funds that support the use of eminent domain for private development. A mark-up is the time that language may be added or changed, so the Committee will be looking at issues like whether federal funds should be withdrawn from projects or from cities that take property for private development and also under what circumstances to allow federal funds to be used for eminent domain (utilities, blight, etc.?).
This is a wonderful opportunity for you to make your voice heard. We encourage you to call, write or visit members of the House Judiciary Committee and share your concerns about eminent domain abuse. Rarely does a Supreme Court decision generate such uniform and widespread outrage. Americans understand just how threatening the Court's decision in Kelo is for ordinary home and small business owners everywhere. Seize this momentum to make a difference at home and nationwide.
Below you will find contact information for all of the members of the House Committee on the Judiciary. Please let us know if you have any questions.
Best,
Christina Walsh
Assistant Castle Coalition Coordinator
Institute for JusticeContact information:
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
Chariman, House Judiciary Committee
2449 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5101
Website http://www.house.gov/sensenbrenner
Posted by lumi at 10:22 PM
From Huge Project, a Mighty Anger Grows
The [ESDC] meeting also revealed that whereas early opposition was driven by a core of residents in Prospect Heights - the neighborhood that would bear the brunt of the new construction - opponents now draw support from a broader swath of neighborhoods in north Brooklyn and elsewhere in the borough, particularly Park Slope. Residents of that neighborhood, south of the project site, accounted for an unusually large number of speakers at the meeting, as did residents from nearby Boerum Hill.
"I think people began to realize how big this is," said Assemblywoman Joan L. Millman, who, in a setback for the developer, announced at the hearing that she would oppose the project.
NoLandGrab: Brooklynites gotta give the Times credit for quoting Assemblywoman Millman and working the announcement of her public stance against Ratner's proposal into the article.
Posted by lumi at 9:31 AM
Public Hearing Testimony Super Post
A couple speakers sent in their testimony from the Empire State Development Corporation [ESDC] Draft Scope EIS hearing this week. The concerns ran the gambit. All testimony was entered into the public record for consideration by the ESDC
Assemblywoman Joan Millman
City Council Member Letitia James
Community Board 6
Prospect Place Block Association
Eric Hager, Riverkeeper
Doug Hamilton, Pacific Plan Alternative
Eric McClure, Park Slope Neighbors, Alternatives & Quality of Life
Aaron Naparstek, Park Slope Civic Council, Traffic & Parking/Transit & Pedestrians
Lumi Rolley, Park Slope Civic Council, Public Spaces, Shadows & Reflections
Alan Rosner, Terrorism & Security
If you testified on Tuesday evening and would like to publish your testimony on line, please send it to, testimony@nolandgrab.org
Posted by lumi at 8:09 AM
NETS $HOOTING FOR LOCAL HELP
Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development (BUILD) was given $100,000 to develop outreach and job-training programs — and $38,000 to hire local residents to distribute Ratner's publication.
The Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance (DBNA), founded by the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, got $50,000 to start-up a child-care, youth and senior facility.
"It is very, very clear that the developer . . . has the . . . wherewithal to buy a lot of people," said a project opponent, the Rev. Dennis Dillon.
Posted by lumi at 7:19 AM
ESDC hears the critics on scale, scope, and more; BUILD is subdued; will affordable housing move east offsite?
Stuck in the office? Or, couldn't break a date to attend last night's ESDC hearing?
Check out the TimesRatnerReport for the best objective account of who said what at last night's hearing.
Get the scoop on where the politicians stand; the unions' point of view; traffic; air pollution; terrorism & security; traffic calming; the footprint property owner who can't get an answer as to why his property was listed in the ESDC document as already being controlled by Ratner; what James Caldwell has to say for himself; water pollution; why the time frame of the EIS is too short; open space; and blight.
Norman Oder took great notes and synthesized a SIX-hour meeting into a five-minute reading.
Of particular interest are Oder's notes on NY State Assemblymember Roger Green's testimony. Green spoke well after the press left to file their stories. Brooklynites want to know if Roger Green is setting the stage for an affordable housing bait and switch?
Also, for a more personal account of last night's hearing, read frogma, Brooklyn arena proposal hearing.
Posted by lumi at 1:07 AM
Newbies miss Millman?
It just occurred to NLG that all three reporters from the daily newspapers who covered last night's hearing were relatively new to the beat and probably are still getting up to speed on the developing story.
That would explain the fact that they all missed the significance of Assemblywoman Joan Millman's testimony.
Why all the fuss about Millman?
The Atlantic Yards project has expanded across Flatbush Avenue. That portion is in Millman's district, thus making her a strong voice in the NY State Assembly's Brooklyn coalition. Last night, she stated that she "will ask [her] Assembly colleagues, including Speaker Sheldon Silver, not to support" the project.
For your reading pleasure, you can check out Assemblywoman Millman's full statement after the jump.
October, 18 2005
Testimony Presented to:
Empire State Development Corporation
Submitted By:
Joan L. Millman
Member of Assembly, 52nd Assembly District
Re: Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project Draft Scope of Analysis
Thank you for the opportunity today to comment on the Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project Draft Scope of Analysis for an Environmental Impact Statement. As the Assemblymember for the 52nd Assembly District, representing Brooklyn Heights, Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens, DUMBO, Vinegar Hill, and Park Slope, I would like to voice my objections to the overwhelming scale of the proposed development and then comment on the need of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement to fully study the potentially harmful effects this project will have on the surrounding neighborhoods in my district.
First and foremost the preliminary plan for the proposed redevelopment at the Atlantic Yards is too large. From the time of this project’s inception we have seen a plan that brought an arena to Brooklyn with some housing attached, turned into a mega development with an arena attached. Seventeen high rises and an estimated 18,000 residents dropped into the middle of a neighborhood with low scale development will not merely change the character of that neighborhood, but will overload the existing infrastructure and impact the general quality of life for my constituents.
Thus far I have yet to see a detailed and adequate plan that will address such concerns, and I am not convinced the Environmental Impact Statement will do so. We need to take a hard look at what the potential effects of this project will be, and not just in the 1/2 mile radius as indicated in the Draft Scope, but within at least a 3/4 mile radius. Let us accurately look at the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on our sewer capacity, the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on our already crowded subways, the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on police and fire personnel demands, the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on the schools, and the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on already overburdened postal service. These are just some of the issues that will impact the quality of life for downtown residents.
I also want to specifically ensure that the potential effect of storm water runoff flowing into certain parts of my district is addressed. The community is fighting a long battle to improve the environmental condition of the Gowanus Canal. We need to ensure that any excess storm water runoff from the proposed project is mitigated and prevented from erasing the years of hard work that went into improving the Canal.
Also, an important concern is the sharp increase in traffic that will result from the arena, commercial development, and the thousands of units of housing. The analysis needs to evaluate how to mitigate traffic in Boerum Hill and Park Slope past the 1/2 mile boundary of study.
I would also like to address the recent addition of the proposed project that is located within my Assembly district. Site 5 is slated for construction located on top of or in lieu of the existing commercial structures. While I am not specifically opposed to development along Flatbush Avenue, I believe it is in excess in light of the already massive construction planned at the yards. Furthermore, I am concerned about the preservation of open space, specifically the community garden located within Site 5. The garden is a product of community cooperation and should be preserved.
Additionally I want to emphasize the need for the community to have significant input for this project as we move forward. I have signed a letter along with other elected officials requesting that the ESDC use fees from Forest City Ratner Companies (FCRC) to fund a community based study. The proper resources are needed in order to maximize the community’s concerns for a project of this magnitude.
Finally, I want to state my opposition to the use of eminent domain for the Atlantic Yards Redevelopment Project. The government takeover of private property should be a last resort and never implemented for private gain. This plan sets a dangerous precedent and I will not support it. Additionally, if State approval is needed to use eminent domain I will not support it, and I will ask my Assembly colleagues, including Speaker Sheldon Silver, not to support it.
While the arena and affordable housing components of this project are beneficial additions to Brooklyn, the size and magnitude of the proposed project is becoming too high a price to pay. FCRC has prided itself on being a development corporation that listens to community concerns, but I have yet to see an adequate plan for solving the potentially harmful problems that this project will create. Thank you.
Joan L. Millman
Member of Assembly
Posted by lumi at 12:07 AM
October 19, 2005
As New HQ Rises, Old Owners Cause Trouble Underfoot
The New York Observer
by Matthew Schuerman
Let's turn our attention from one Ratner land grab to another:
Over three years ago, the state condemned the 11 parcels on the site to make way for the new 52-story building, and at the time paid out $86 million to the former owners.
Now 10 of the landlords who feel they have been ripped off are calling for their day in court—and a bigger check. (The 11th took the money and ran.)
Read about how the government regularly undervalues property during eminent domain seizures. In the case of the Ratner/NY Times project, if the former property owners prevail in court, the taxpayers get to pay the difference.
Posted by lumi at 11:33 PM
Yeas and Nays Mark Atlantic Yards Meeting In Brooklyn
Commercial Property News
by Steve Viuker
Following a stormy town meeting last night in which protesters to Brooklyn's planned Atlantic Yards project vehemently shot it down, some wonder if the whole thing could be derailed.
The hearing, which was held to consider environmental concerns related to the project, instead became a shouting match on the proposal's pluses and minuses.
NoLandGrab: To be fair, the hearing wasn't just a big "shouting match." Most speakers were heard and even those who were being heckled still had their say.
Posted by lumi at 11:26 PM
Out of the Woods?
The Real Estate Observer
by Matthew Schuerman
Apparently there was no quid pro quo and no one lied. The entire issue about whether or not Forest City Ratner is paying for community support has been explained away by Ratner's PR guy — they forgot to issue a press release!
“When we provide funding for programs that are good then we should let the public know about that, and when we gave these organizations money after we signed the community benefits agreement, we should have put out a press release at that time,” Forest City spokesman Joe DePlasco told the Real Estate. “If you are trying to operate in an open enough way as possible, when you miss one thing, people will say, ‘Oh you missed one thing.’”
Posted by lumi at 6:00 PM
Overdevelopment: Planning, Not Rezoning, Is The Answer
Gotham Gazette article by CUNY professor and speaker at last night's public hearing Tom Angotti:
The real problem with downzoning to stop overdevelopment, or upzoning to encourage development, is that they both avoid any serious planning, both in each neighborhood and in the city as a whole. They don’t allow local residents and businesses to address serious concerns they have with everything from housing needs to traffic, because zoning regulations are limited to use and density controls.
Imagine if the city were to take seriously the question of building housing to meet the present and future needs of New Yorkers. The city’s planners might do some projections and then work with every neighborhood in the city to see how they could accommodate their fair share of the need
Posted by lumi at 10:32 AM
How Eminent Domain Ran Amok
The Hoover Institution, Policy Review
By Carla T. Main
A thoroughly researched case for seriously taking on the cause of eminent domain abuse and not letting it become the issue du jour.
Posted by lumi at 10:12 AM
Ratner "seed money" buys lots of grassroots
Here's the latest tally of Ratner "seed money" from yesterday's Juan Gonzales Daily News column and today's Nick Confessore NY Times report:
BUILD |
$138,000 |
Rev. Daughtry |
$50,000 |
TOTAL disclosed Ratner payout to date |
$188,000 |
* Payments do not include material support (i.e. rent, office equipment, hiring of PR firm, catering, etc.)
Posted by lumi at 9:30 AM
New London severs ties with development authority
The [New London, CT] Day (www.theday.com)
While Brooklynites' attention was focused on last night's hearings, the unthinkable happened in New London, CT (home of the Kelo eminent domain case).
NEW LONDON, Conn. -- The city council has voted to sever ties with the quasi-public development authority at the center of a national debate over eminent domain powers.
The council voted 6-0 Monday night to revoke the designation of the New London Development Corp. as the city's "implementing agency" for its Fort Trumbull development. The agency has guided the $73 million state-funded project since its inception in 1998.
The U.S. Supreme Court sparked a national debate in June when it ruled the development authority had the power to take homes for the private development project.
But the development corporation angered state and local officials by sending orders to vacate to five Fort Trumbull residents living on the property that the developer wants for a hotel and office space.
State officials had asked municipalities to hold off on property seizures until the legislature considers changing the state's eminent domain laws.
City officials asked the development authorities' two leaders to resign, but they declined. They did rescind the orders to vacate under pressure from Gov. M. Jodi Rell.
But council members said they could no longer deal with an agency that disregared the city's rights as a development partner and the wishes of the community.
"I don't think you can continue a partnership where there's only one partner saying, 'I'm willing to go back and forth,' and the other's saying, 'I've heard you, but I'm going the other way,"' Councilor Rob Pero said.
The council also voted Monday to demand the agency transfer title to all its real estate in the project area to the city of New London. That includes the former Naval Undersea Warfare Center at Fort Trumbull, which was transferred by the U.S. government to the development authority, not the city.
"I think we're divorced," Mayor Jane Glover said.
The future of the homes and the development project is unclear.
City Lawyer Thomas Londregan had asked the council to postpone the vote, until it consulted with the state Department of Economic and Community Development.
"The state has a 70 plus million dollar mortgage on the (affected) property," Londregan wrote in a memo also provided to the council. "We need to hear from them."
The development corporation's president, Michael Joplin, did not return calls seeking comment on the vote.
Information from: The Day, http://www.theday.com
Posted by lumi at 8:39 AM
The People Speak (Shout, Actually) on Brooklyn Arena Project
The NY Times
by Nick Confessore
Another BIG revelation about FCRC and "community" groups is buried at the end of the article.
[FCRC Exec. VP Jim] Stuckey was asked to specify which of eight groups that signed a community benefits agreement with Forest City Ratner last June were currently receiving funds from the developer.
He said that Forest City Ratner had also provided $50,000 in seed money to the Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance, a group founded by the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, a prominent supporter of the Atlantic Yards project
The Times's piece does a pretty good job of describing the scene at last night's hearing, but they missed the significance of Assembly Member Joan Millman's testimony (see below).
More coverage:
The NY Sun, At Hearing Critics Attack Ratner Project
NY Daily News, SRO crowd takes shots at Nets plan
Posted by lumi at 8:19 AM
"Independent" Group Admits Getting Cash From Ratner
WNYC News Radio
by Andrea Bernstein
This article documents BUILD's recent denials. But, despite the headline "'Independent' Group Admits...," the only admission that BUILD received developer funding in this report is from a Forest City Ratner spokesperson. Does that mean that BUILD still hasn't admitted anything?
MARIE LOUIS: What you have is an application we don’t have anything that documents revenues, that 1023 form is an application form.
REPORTER: But it says, in answer to the question, it says 5 million dollars WAS contributed by Forest City Ratner.
MARIE LOUIS: No it doesn’t. There is there is nothing that says we have received any money because we have not.
REPORTER: So why did they tell the IRS that they had?
MARIE LOUIS: We have not received 5 million dollars.
REPORTER: How much money have you received?
MARIE LOUIS: We have not received any money from Forest City Ratner.
article (including Real Audio link)
Posted by lumi at 7:54 AM
October 18, 2005
Millman headlines hearing with firm stand against Yards
Assembly Member Joan Millman led off the proceedings, hitting the ball out of the park to a mostly cheering crowd, when she announced that she will ask NYS House Speaker Sheldon Silver to NOT support Ratner's project.
Millman was the first speaker to be heard by the Empire State Development Corporation at this evening's hearing. The lead-off spot went to Millman after it was clear that tardy Marty hadn't yet arrived.
The Assembly Member protested the overscale, was deeply concerned about the effect of run-off in the Gowanus Canal, traffic congestion and the enlargement of the project to "Site V" in Park Slope. She came out firmly against the use of eminent domain in this case and called upon the ESDC to use the funding from Forest City Ratner to pay for a community-based review of the Environmental Impact Statement.
Posted by lumi at 11:28 PM
BUILD admits Ratner funding
The Daily News
Never mind the "smoking gun," Juan Gonzalez drops a BOMBSHELL!
It has taken a while for the story to develop because Forest City Ratner is coming clean in drips and drabs.
[BUILD] has finally admitted it is being bankrolled by Forest City Ratner, the project's developer.
First, Ratner lied about funding BUILD, and BUILD lied about being Ratner-funded. Then, BUILD's own IRS form indicated otherwise. When confronted by their own IRS filing, BUILD claimed no money changed hands.
Then late last week, the group and Ratner made a clarification.
Yes, some money has changed hands.
Aside from cash, Ratner also paid the bill on the Pacific St. storefront location, bought the office equipment, paid for BUILD's PR agency, and for BUILD to distribute both issues of The Brooklyn "it's-not-a-newspaper" Standard.
But wait there's more!
Read about how BUILD not only repeatedly lied to the press and the community, which is a sin, but also broke the law!
Posted by lumi at 3:30 PM
TODAY: Public Hearing for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Scope
VERY IMPORTANT MEETING!
Tuesday, 5-8PM
NYC College of Technology, Klitgord Auditorium
285 Jay St.
This is the one chance for concerned Brooklynites to be heard in order to help shape the "scope" of the Environmental Impact Statment.
Yes, the hearing is pro forma, but it is your ONLY opportunity to be heard if you don't have your own "newspaper" or "