« Yonkers councilwoman's lawyers meet with feds in Ridge Hill probe | Main | Courier News Round-Up »

May 10, 2008

Yards foes: Let’s set the records straight

The Brooklyn Paper's letter to the editor section was on fire with Ratner criticism. A letter from Daniel Goldstein criticizes a previous letter insinuating that DDDB only represents white, brownstone Brooklynites.

Those who have already been displaced by the threat of eminent domain, and those who remain steadfast in their homes, include rent-stabilized tenants, homeowners, business owners and commercial property owners. This courageous group includes African-Americans, whites, Latinos, and people of South Asian and Middle Eastern descent.

Last we checked, these were all Americans deserving the right to defend what they view as an abuse of their constitutional rights, and an improper seizure of their homes and businesses. DDDB’s support of these tenants and owners is resolute, and absolute.

Steve de Sève wins the humor and irony awards:

How stupid of Bruce Ratner to replace “Miss Brooklyn” with a building called “Building number 1,” especially since it looks like number two. That building literally looks like robot poop! (“The new ‘Miss Brooklyn,’” online update, May 5). Brooklyn Bridge Realty

Hey Frank Gehry, stop dumping on Brooklyn!

Also, one thing that was interesting about Saturday’s rally against Atlantic Yards: There was a counter-protest by some union guys. Imagine: this was the first time I can remember that a “save-our-homes” rally has been protested against.

Larry Penner looks at how developer money pays off officials and community groups (we're looking at you today, Al Sharpton), with taxpayers paying for the projects:

Your recent story about the city’s use of taxpayer dollars to underwrite Bruce Ratner’s land purchases (“Tax dollars paid for this mess,” May 3) was insightful. In too many cases, projects have been heavily subsidized by taxpayers, commonly known as corporate welfare. Between direct government funding, low interest loans and long term tax exemptions, the bill to taxpayers may be greater than the benefits.

There also is a relationship between pay-to-play campaign contributions from developers to elected officials looking for favorable legislation, permits and subsidies. Don’t forget the conflict of interest for senior staff from city or state regulatory and permitting agencies.

Too many leave at the end of any mayoral or governor’s administration to become consultants to the same developers they previously oversaw (yes, I’m talking about you, former Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff).

link

Posted by amy at May 10, 2008 10:13 AM