« Media Alert: Demonstration Against Ratner's Junk Yard Bonds | Main | Atlantic Yards YES! Transit-riding city school kids NO!! »
December 12, 2009
Learning from Willets Point, Parts 1 and 2
Atlantic Yards Report
On Thursday night, Bob McNamara, an attorney for the libertarian Institute for Justice, suggested that, in New York, loose blight standards foster the state's use of eminent domain: "The proper word for what these properties are is not blighted. The proper word is coveted."
So it seems is the case in Willets Point, where the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC) today announced that it has received 29 responses to its Request for Qualifications for developers or teams of developers interested in redeveloping the 62-acre Willets Point District. Next up: a Request for Proposals (RFP) some time next year.
And if 29 companies want to redevelop Willets Point, how could it be that there was no market for the Vanderbilt Yard, as Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials insist in a pending lawsuit over the agency's decision to renegotiate the deal with Forest City Ratner?
As Eric McClure of No Land Grab suggests:
Maybe it's just us, but something is not quite adding up. And it certainly would seem to add some traction to the lawsuit claiming that the MTA failed to properly carry out its fiduciary duty in its agreement to sell the Vanderbilt Yard to Forest City.
In fact, as McClure notes, the robust open market response to Willets Point, in a lousy economy, puts in perspective the recruitment of only one developer beyond Forest City Ratner, in the hot real estate economy of 2005, to bid for the Vanderbilt Yard. Hint: it was a done deal.
Just this past week we were reminded of an investigation by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo into the questionable lobbying by the Flushing-Willets Point-Corona Local Development Corporation (FWPCLDC), paid by the city to lobby for the Willets Point urban renewal plan before the City Council.
Willets Point United, a group of business owners fighting the plan and the prospect of eminent domain, noted that, despite the investigation, the LDC, led by former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman, "has not only continued its unlawful operations with impunity, but has been awarded an additional state grant in excess of $1.5 million."
The New York Times reported that the Bloomberg administration was not merely resistant to the investigation, it was downright hostile, threatening Cuomo's likely run for governor. Willets Point United warned:
If the Mayor's administration has resorted to using such tactics against AG Cuomo, there should be no doubt that it has used similarly despicable tactics against the people of Willets Point throughout the attempt to acquire their property.
The Downtown Brooklyn Partnership
In August, after a Times story on the FWPCLDC, I suggested that the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership (DBP), also funded in part by the city, had similarly tried to "influence legislation by propaganda or otherwise." I cited testimony by DBP representatives before the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Empire State Development Corporation.
I have no reason to think my post alerted the Attorney General's office, but, on 10/29/09, the Times reported that the investigation had in fact gone beyond the FWPCLDC:
That investigation has expanded into the activities of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, which the city helped create in 2006 to help push through development plans following a broad rezoning of the area.
So, is that investigation still going on? Has it been dismissed? To what extent does/did it involve the Partnership's work lobbying for Atlantic Yards?
Posted by steve at December 12, 2009 7:55 AM