Condemning Authority: City of New York
New York’s highest court ruled last Tuesday that the state can seize private property for the 22-acre highly controversial Atlantic Yards development.
The Court of Appeals ruled 6 to 1 that the state could exercise eminent domain for claiming businesses, public property and private homes for economic development. The Court also stated that the Atlantic Yards project falls under the category of economic development, and also backed the state’s assessment that the area in question fits the legal definition of being blighted.
This ruling also reaffirmed that the state of New York’s effort to curb eminent domain has ceased to exist, even after the landmark case of Kelo v. City of New London in 2005. Since then, several other states have seen significant legislative reform.
Construction work is already underway at portions of the site for the project, and the developer anticipates that it will take more than two years to build the arena and move the NJ Nets to Brooklyn. They are hoping the move takes place in 2012.
To read the court’s full decision, click here. Below is a photo courtesy of the NY Times, which gives a layout for the project. Click here to read a full story from the NY Times.
October 21, 2009
The Atlantic Yards project was hit with yet another lawsuit last Monday. The suit was brought on by Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB), a local grassroots organization, along with 20 other community groups.
The suit alleges that the agency co-financing the development has acted illegally by abandoning the statutorily mandated purpose of the project, the removal of blight from the area. This is the fourth lawsuit brought against the agency, Forest City Ratner and the NY public transit authority.
The Empire State Development Corporation will provide $700 million in tax-free debt financing for the project, so long as it is underway by the end of 2009. The developer, Ratner, has been pursuing for six years.
The new suit is titled: Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn et al. versus Empire State Development Corp et al. and will be heard in the NY State Supreme Court.
October 15, 2009
The long awaited Atlantic Yards case began hearing on Wednesday in New York’s highest court.
The case, which has been ongoing for the past three years, was brought by a group of property owners who owned property on the site of the proposed basketball arena and apartment development.
Originally, the owners contended that the state of New York exceeded its constitutional authority in condemning their property for the project. The appellate court sided with the state last May; however the Court of Appeals agreed to hear the case just months later, which suggests that the case raised questions about the limits of state power in economic development that haven’t been answered.
Lawyers for the Empire State Development Corporation, the state authority sponsoring the project, argued that eminent domain was indeed necessary to promote economic development in the area, saying that the site that was chosen met the definition of a “blighted” area.
Lawyers representing the homeowners argue that deeming the area “blighted” was merely a justification for planning and development for the project.
Yesterday’s one-hour hearing consisted of questioning from several judges over what limits the state faced when it sought to condemn private property.
Some of the questions suggested, however, that the judges believed that the rights of the owners had not received enough consideration from state officials. The hearing will determine whether the state of New York has the authority to condemn property and force owners to sell to the delevopment, Bruce Ratner.
September 9, 2009
Last Wednesday, Bruce Ratner unveiled his new design for the hopeful 18,000-seat basketball arena for the Nets, near Downtown Brooklyn.
Ratner hopes to get approval from the Empire State Development Corporation next week, and if that happens he will then try to raise around $700 million in tax-exempt financing for the development.
If he gets the proceeds, they will have to be held in escrow until the Court of Appeals issues their decision on the case, which will be heard later this year.
Click here to view photos of the new proposed arena, featured from the NY Times.
August 10, 2009
“Atlantic Yards” Developer Races a Court Hearing, a Bond Deadline and Opponents”
By Charles V. Bagli
The New York Times
Published August 9, 2009
As the usual tumult greeted the final public hearings on the Atlantic Yards development last month, it was business as usual for the developer Bruce C. Ratner.
He visited three rating agencies in preparation for selling bonds this fall to finance the first project in the 22-acre development near Downtown Brooklyn: an $800 million, 18,000-seat arena for the New Jersey Nets.
He flew to Moscow to meet with the billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov about investing in the money-losing Nets. He went to and from City Hall and the state’s economic development offices on Third Avenue to complete the paperwork for the Atlantic Yards development and to start work on the arena.
“We are racing to the finish line,” Mr. Ratner said in an interview as the public hearing drew to a close. “Our sense is that while this project was important five years ago, it has become even more important given the economy and the job situation in the city.”
Aside from the rebuilding of the World Trade Center, Atlantic Yards is the largest project in the city moving forward. The redevelopment of the 26-acre Hudson Yards in Manhattan and dozens of other projects have been slowed or stopped by a flagging economy and a lack of real estate financing. But Mr. Ratner must clear a number of important hurdles before starting construction of the arena and the first four residential towers.
There is an Oct. 14 hearing before the state’s highest court, where opponents hope to scuttle Atlantic Yards by challenging the state’s use of eminent domain. Beyond that, there is a looming deadline: he must get the financing done and start work by Dec. 31 in order to qualify for a much needed tax-exempt bond status and hold on to a $400 million naming-rights deal with Barclays Bank for the arena.
Mr. Ratner acknowledged that he was also seeking additional investors for the Nets, but he said he and his company would retain a substantial stake in the team, which he hopes to move to Brooklyn during the 2011-12 season.
Mr. Ratner has already pared back the cost of the arena from $1 billion and replaced the original architect, Frank Gehry, with the firm of Ellerbe Becket, which has designed a number of basketball arenas. At the same time, he struck new agreements with both the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which owns the railroad yard where Mr. Ratner wants to build the arena, and the state to revise his original plans.
Officials have given him more time to build eight acres of publicly accessible open space and as many as 16 buildings and 6,400 apartments, while allowing him to replace the railyard with a smaller, less expensive yard than originally planned. About 40 percent of the housing would be built for low-, moderate- and middle-income families.
Critics, led by the group Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, contend that Atlantic Yards will overwhelm the neighborhood and unfairly benefit a developer who they say has received too many subsidies, including $305 million from the city and the state, along with tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks.
The Court of Appeals has set an Oct. 14 date for oral arguments: some local property owners are challenging a unanimous lower court decision approving the state’s use of eminent domain. Daniel Goldstein, a spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy and one of the property owners, said “the project is dead” if their appeal is successful. A decision is expected in November.
Regardless, he added, “We plan on bringing at least two more significant lawsuits against the phantom project,” a reference to the developer’s failure to release new images of his buildings after scrapping the original designs.
Mr. Ratner said he expected to release new images of the arena before Labor Day. “I think the final architecture will be really beautiful,” he said.
The developer disputed critics who claim that he may never build the parks and affordable housing that he once promised, now that the expected completion date has been pushed out to 2019, from 2016. Mr. Ratner said there was a continuing need for affordable housing for the city’s teachers, nurses, firefighters and hotel workers.
“There is a stable and steady group of takers for work-force housing in the city,” Mr. Ratner said. “The goal is not just to create the required amount but possibly more than that.”
In recent weeks, the developer has sought additional housing subsidies from city officials, who have so far declined to go beyond the standard incentives for developers. The project’s underwriters, led by Goldman Sachs, are also preparing to sell about $700 million in bonds for the arena in October.
Some real estate executives and critics said it would be hard to sell the bonds for such an uncertain project. But Jay Abrams, a bond analyst at FMS Bonds, said there “is definitely an appetite for tax-exempt bonds in New York, and elsewhere.” The lawsuit, he added, “is not necessarily a game-killer. At the right price, there’s always a buyer for bonds.”
July 27, 2009
“Atlantic antics! Yards hearing goes haywire!”
By Mike McLaughlin
The Brooklyn Paper
Last night’s public hearing about the recent changes to the Atlantic Yards proposal that gave would-be developer Bruce Ratner sweeter terms degenerated into mayhem as supporters and opponents shouted at each other and the state panel overseeing the stalled megaproject.
The meeting unleashed years of built-up frustration from people on both sides of the issue who long ago made up their minds on the merits of the basketball arena and 16-skyscraper development planned for Prospect Heights.
Union workers heckled anyone who asked questions critical of the project and eventually broke into stentorian chants of “Build it now!” and “Union jobs!” that brought the informational hearing to a standstill.
Eventually, the workers marched out en masse.
Opponents of project, which currently calls for the arena and one to four towers around it, also sporadically jeered the representatives from Forest City Ratner and the Empire State Development Corporation for evading some questions about the project’s status.
The meeting, held by Community Boards 2, 6 and 8, was organized because the changes approved last month allow Forest City to build the project at a slower pace, pay the Metropolitan Transportation Authority less money up front to build for development rights to a smaller portion of the railyards at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues, and to make less-costly railyard renovations than initially promised.
In the one substantive moment in the hearing, MaryAnne Gilmartin, executive vice president of Forest City Ratner, told the panel that the company has already spent more than $500 million on Atlantic Yards and will build the entire $4.9-billion development.
“Some have said that the housing won’t get built,” she said, referring to the stretched-out construction timetable. “I assure you that it will … We are motivated by our required return hurdles to build, and build expeditiously.”
Critics were disappointed that the company did not offer any renderings for the arena, which is now being drafte by a Midwest architecture firm after Ratner fired Frank Gehry, whose innovative design was one of the project’s initial selling points.
The state, meanwhile, dismissed a report by the city’s Independent Budget Office that said the basketball arena would in fact be a net loss for taxpayers, rather than the promised generator of revenues.
“Own analysis [covers] the entire project,” said Steve Matlin, counsel at the ESDC. “Our calculation determined that it would be a significant benefit to the city and state.”
Two more venting sessions are scheduled for next week. In anticipation of more fireworks, the ESDC posted to its Web site on Wednesday a document called, “Protocol for Public Hearing on the
2009 Modified General Project Plan for the Atlantic Yards Project.”
It stipulates that “any attendee who disrupts the proceedings will be escorted off the premises.”
It also asks that written comments can be submitted via e-mail at atlanticyards@empire.state.ny.us, or via snailm mail to the Empire State Development Corporation, 633 Third Ave., New York, NY 10017. Attention: Steve Matlin, Senior Counsel
Empire State Development Corporation hearing on the revised Atlantic Yards project, NYC College of Technology [285 Jay St., between Tillary and Johnson streets in Downtown, (212) 803-3740], July 29 and 30 at 2-5 pm and 6-8 pm.
July 1, 2009
The New York State Court of Appeals, the highest court in the state, has announced that it will hear the Atlantic Yards eminent domain case, Goldstein et al. v. N.Y. State Urban Development Corporation, in October 2009.
The nine property owners challenging the targeted seizure argue that the use of eminent domain for the project violates New York State Constitution. The original case was filed by the affected property owners back in August 2008 in the Appellate Division, as required by New York State eminent domain law. The Appellate Division ruled on May 15.
Click here to read more a more detailed description of the Court’s acceptance to hear the case.
June 17, 2009
The Atlantic Yards developer confirmed last week that Frank Gehry is off the project, due to major budget cuts.
After Gehry’s departure, the budget of the project was lowered from $1 billion to about $200 million.
“The current economic climate is not right for this design,” said Bruce Ratner, the chief executive of Forest City Ratner. Gehry’s design for the project, at one point, consisted of 17 buildings, pictured below.
The read the full story from The Globe and Mail, click here. Photo is courtesy of The Globe and Mail.
June 15, 2009
Last week, owners and tenants filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals on Constitutional Grounds in the state of New York, challenging the state’s effort to seize their properties by eminent domain for Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards development plan.
To view the Notice of Appeal and more information regarding the project, click here.
June 2, 2009
The New York Senate had a “fact finding” hearing for the controversial Atlantic Yards project last Friday.
At the meeting, among much chaos and disagreements between proponents and opposers of the project, it was confirmed that it will be smaller than anticipated.
Due to the impact the bad economy has had on development projects, developer Bruce Ratner has announced the $950 million project will be scaled back to $800 million.
Most of the design changes will be made to the project’s centerpiece, the Barclays Center Coliseum, which will have less amenities such as luxury boxes.
Despite Ratner’s recent press release comments, the meeting also revealed that no construction dates or schedule have been set.
For more details, please refer to the original story here.
May 25, 2009
The appellate division voted 4-0 in favor of the state on May 15th upholding its use of eminent domain for the controversial Atlantic Yards Development in Brooklyn.
The decision marked the 23rd consecutive ruling in favor of the project since 2007.
“We’re thrilled with today’s decision,” said Bruce Ratner, CEO and chairman of Forest City Ratner Companies. “The world has changed significantly since we announced this project in December 2003. But one thing has never changed – Forest City’s commitment to bringing the Nets to Brooklyn and building an arena and residential community that will make the people of Brooklyn and the entire City proud.”
In addition to bringing the Nets to play at Barclays Center for the 2011-2012 season, Ratner claimed the project will also mean more affordable housing, jobs and other entertainment in Brooklyn.
The group of nine tenants and owners whose property is targeted for condemnation disagree, however, and plan to appeal the decision to the state’s court of appeals.
October 6, 2008
This information was taken from the PlanNYC/Planning Information Portal. For additional information, please visit their website at: http://www.plannyc.org/project-5-Atlantic-Yards-Plan
Recent News is listed below:
| Court Tosses Atlantic Yards environmental Lawsuit
By the Associated Press, printed online on Feb. 26, 2009
NEW YORK - A state appeals court has upheld a lower court’s ruling dismissing a lawsuit filed by a coalition of community groups opposed to the massive Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn.
The appeals court decision, issued Thursday, says the state’s environmental review of traffic, crowds, potential terrorism and other concerns satisfied legal requirements. The $4 billion, 22-acre development includes an arena for the New Jersey Nets, office towers and thousands of apartments near downtown Brooklyn.
Project developer Forest City Ratner and Mayor Michael Bloomberg are applauding the ruling. A spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn says the coalition might appeal.
The project still faces another lawsuit challenging the state’s right to use eminent domain to demolish more than a dozen properties.
Atlantic Yards Opponents Pleased With Court’s Denial of Motion
by Associated Press (), published online 10-01-2008
|
| |
 |
|
DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN (AP) — A development that would transform Brooklyn with an NBA Nets arena and apartment buildings could be delayed by an additional six months, numerous media outlets are reporting.A state appellate court on Monday declined to dismiss a lawsuit filed by opponents seeking to block the state from using eminent domain to seize property where the massive Atlantic Yards development is slated to be built.
Developer Bruce C. Ratner said in a statement that the long-delayed development “will be built and it will create thousands of needed jobs and affordable homes.”
The project’s opponents were pleased with the court’s decision. Opposition group Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn called the ruling a “major setback” for the development.
Ratner plans to build an office tower, 15 apartment buildings and a basketball arena.
Borough President Marty Markowitz said that he is disappointed by the recent denial of the motion to dismiss the eminent domain suit filed by opponents of Atlantic Yards.
“I truly believe that in the current economy, Brooklyn needs the kind of investment that Atlantic Yards will bring, the union jobs and affordable housing it will create. Projects like this one are catalysts for job creation and growth, and Atlantic Yards is a very important part of the effort to help Downtown Brooklyn, which is so well-served by public transit, become the kind of live-work hub and center of cultural life that our borough of 2.5 million has long deserved.”
Ryan Thompson of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle contributed to this article.
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=4&id=23507 |
|
-End-
Forest City Ratner Companies has proposed a large-scale, mixed-use real estate development that would consist of a 19,000-seat basketball arena; 4,500 units of housing; over 2.4 million square feet of office and retail space; and six acres of open space and parking for 3,000 cars. Since the initial proposal, several changes by the developer have been discussed. The developer has been negotiating a community benefits agreement (CBA) with a group of stakeholders, covering especially affordable housing and local hiring. The project footprint may change slightly, to reduce the need for property takings through eminent domain. On March 3, 2005 the City and the State signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the developer.
For supporters, the project would bring jobs, housing, a world-class sports and entertainment complex and economic development to the affected neighborhoods and the borough. For opponents, it is an ill-conceived, out-of-scale proposal that would squander taxpayer dollars, displace existing residents and businesses, bring few benefits to the area, and swamp adjoining neighborhoods with traffic. On October 26, 2006, opponents of the plan filed a suit in federal court against Forest City Ratner CEO Bruce Ratner and several representatives of New York City and New York state, challenging the state’s use of eminent domain in acquiring land for the project. On December 20th, 2006 the Public Authorities Control Board approved the project, the last offical approval needed to begin construction.
Current News:
Brooklyn Arena Builder Plans to Break Ground in December After Delay
September 10, 2008
By CHARLES V. BAGLI
The developer Bruce C. Ratner has told state and city officials that he plans to break ground in December on his long-delayed $4 billion Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, which will feature thousands of apartments and offices in 16 towers built around a glamorous basketball arena for the Nets.
But it is unclear whether Mr. Ratner will be able to meet his own deadline to start one of the most ambitious projects in Brooklyn in decades, given the softening economy, the crisis in the debt markets, rising costs and a persistent group of opponents who have filed one lawsuit after another.
The developer has been rushing to have a November closing on his deal with state officials and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which owns a section of the 22 acres he plans to use for the project.
Mr. Ratner, who is the chairman of Forest City Ratner; his bankers at Goldman Sachs; and David Stern, commissioner of the National Basketball Association, also met last week with bond-rating agencies to discuss the proposed financing for the $950 million arena, which was designed by Frank Gehry. (Forest City Ratner was the development partner for the new Manhattan headquarters of The New York Times Company.)
But that financing plan for the arena, known as Barclays Center, is dependent on a favorable ruling by the Treasury Department in the coming weeks that would allow Mr. Ratner to use tax-exempt bonds and a final victory over court challenges. If he is barred from using tax-exempt bonds, his costs will increase substantially for what would already be the most expensive arena in the world.
Either way, bankers and real estate executives say it will be difficult to sell bonds for an arena at a time when New York’s real estate boom has quieted and investors and lenders are wary of backing large-scale projects.
Indeed, Mr. Ratner has asked government officials recently for as much as $100 million in additional cash for the project, citing rising costs and problems in the bond markets, according to two officials who would speak only on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the negotiations. The city and the state have already agreed to provide $300 million in subsidies and tens of millions in tax breaks.
Still, in a conference call with stock analysts on Tuesday, Charles Ratner, the chief executive of Mr. Ratner’s parent company, Forest City Enterprises, said that Atlantic Yards was the biggest project in their development pipeline and that he was confident that “we can make it happen” by the end of the year.
Joseph DePlasco, a spokesman for Bruce Ratner, said his company had drawn up documents for a tax-exempt bond offering that would enable them to move quickly after the Treasury Department issued its ruling. But, he said, Forest City and Goldman Sachs were also confident that they could obtain taxable financing, if needed.
“While it is a tough market, we have secured more than $1.5 billion in construction loans this year so far,” Mr. DePlasco said. “And this is the most exciting project in the country and the most exciting arena in the world.”
One reason Mr. Ratner may be forging ahead is his deal with Barclays Bank, which officials say provides him with $20 million a year for naming the arena after it. The naming rights contract requires Forest City to close on the land and the financing by the end of November.
Mr. DePlasco declined to discuss the company’s arrangement with Barclays.
But opponents, who object to the size of the project, its impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the use of eminent domain by the state, said that Mr. Ratner would fall short of his goal.
“There’s no way they’ll get control of the land they need, get the financing, end the litigation and break ground by December,” said Daniel Goldstein, a spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, the project’s primary opponent. Andrew DeSouza, a spokesman for the Treasury Department, declined to comment on whether a decision concerning tax-exempt financing for stadiums and arenas was imminent. The Internal Revenue Service issued proposed regulations in 2006 that would make it more difficult, if not impossible, for tax-exempt bonds to be used for private sports teams.
The Treasury Department has been soliciting comments ever since. Both the city and the state have lobbied on behalf of the Atlantic Yards project, as well as for the Yankees and the Mets, which are already building stadiums with tax-exempt bonds.
It is unlikely that Mr. Ratner will be able to get more cash from the city or the state, but he is also negotiating for tax subsidies to ensure that at least 30 percent of the 6,000 apartments in the complex would be affordable for low- and moderate-income families. Talks are also continuing with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/nyregion/10yards.htm?_r=1&oref=slogin
-END-
Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Atlantic Yards
By PETER KIEFER, Staff Reporter of the Sun
June 24, 2008
The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected a request to take up a case by property owners and tenants facing eviction by Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards development project in Brooklyn.
The decision is the latest in a string of legal victories for the developer, Bruce Ratner, who has faced legal challenges by tenants, property owners, and preservationists.
The petition asked the court to consider the appropriate constitutional limits on the government’s use of eminent domain.
The 11-property owner and tenants who served as plaintiffs issued a release yesterday morning pledging to take the case to state court.
“We are, of course, disappointed that the Court declined our request to hear this important case. This is not, however, a ruling on the merits of our claims. Our claims remain sound,” the group said.
Mr. Ratner is seeking to build 16 skyscrapers, a new 18,000-seat Nets basketball arena, and thousands of apartments.
In a statement issued yesterday, Mr. Ratner noted that in February the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in the developer’s favor. The appeals court affirmed an earlier decision by the New York Southern District Court, which ruled that the use of eminent domain for the Atlantic Yards project does not violate the public good.
“We believe, and the courts have repeatedly agreed, that Atlantic Yards provides significant public benefits, including thousands of affordable homes and much-needed jobs for Brooklyn,” Mr. Ratner said. “We are gratified that the Supreme Court has decided to put an end to this lawsuit. The opponents have now lost 20 court decisions relating to Atlantic Yards, and we are now one step closer to making these benefits a reality for the borough and the city.”
http://www.nysun.com/new-york/us-supreme-court-turns-down-atlantic-yards-appeal/80499/
-END-
New York Times
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and ANDY NEWMAN
Published: July 1, 2007
Ever since it was proposed, the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn has simultaneously been the borough’s biggest, most controversial and least understood real estate development.
Critics have long suggested that the project is a taxpayer-subsidized bonanza for the developer, the project’s promised jobs and subsidized housing a kind of Trojan horse for the thousands of high-end apartments that come with them. But the developer, Forest City Ratner, and state officials overseeing the project have resisted divulging much information about the project’s financial structure, confining those criticisms to the realm of speculation.
That debate may be revived because of a lawsuit that has wrung free hundreds of pages of internal documents from the Empire State Development Corporation, the state agency overseeing the project. An analysis of the documents suggests that the Atlantic Yards behemoth - 8 million square feet of apartments, offices, stores and an arena planned for 22 acres near Downtown Brooklyn - may in fact be a delicate beast.
“The documents confirm that the overall project is risky,” said James F. Brennan, a Brooklyn assemblyman who, with State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, also of Brooklyn, sued the development corporation to obtain the documents. “This information should have been disclosed to the public before the project was approved.”
Follow the link to read the rest of the article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/nyregion/01yardsxx.html?pagewanted=1
June 28th, 2007
Rally Against Eminent Domain Abuse, Four City Concil Members, and the “Willets Point Effect”
As the fight against eminent domain abuse heats up, maybe it’s time to start talking about “the Willets Point effect.” The coalition fighting the Atlantic Yards project has gathered savvy from a high-profile battle lasting more than three years. Those challenging Columbia University’s West Harlem expansion have a clear David vs. Goliath fight. And the two homeowners on Duffield Street in Downtown Brooklyn have strong suggestions of a link to the Underground Railroad in the face of denial by the city agency that wants their land.
(Photos by Jonathan Barkey; here’s the full portfolio.)
But the 225 businesses operating in the “Iron Triangle” of Willets Point, Queens, employing some 1800 workers, have the manpower and muscle to mount a very public fight against the city’s plans for an upscale development that would include some 5500 housing units, a hotel and convention center, a million square feet of retail and 500,000 square feet of office space.
So, as the four disparate groups gathered yesterday on the steps of City Hall to join in a rally as New Yorkers Against Eminent Domain Abuse, the Willets Point contingent was the largest and the loudest, wearing hats and t-shirts indicating their protest, arriving by bus with signs in tow.
And given that a good number were white guys who do physical labor, the group in some ways echoed the contingent of construction workers who flooded Atlantic Yards public hearings last summer to argue for, rather than against, condemnation.
More than 100
The rally, hosted by Lumi Rolley of NoLandGrab (who has honored me here and here) and promoted by Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB), drew more than 100 protesters, including City Council Members Letitia James and Charles Barron of Brooklyn, Tony Avella and Hiram Monserrate of Queens, plus the chief of staff of Council Member John Liu, also from Queens.
The gathering occurred just a few days after the second anniversary of the Supreme Court’s controversial 5-4 Kelo v. New London decision, which reaffirmed the right of governmental entities to take private land for economic development, again saying that tax revenues do constitute an example of “public purpose”-as opposed to “public use” as eminent domain was originally defined.
The decision generated a backlash around the country across the political spectrum, beyond the right-wing and libertarian groups that have long opposed eminent domain. (Several people yesterday carried signs produced by the Institute for Justice, a longtime opponent of eminent domain.)
Many states-though not New York–have passed laws to narrow the use of eminent domain. Still, most states have not tightened the definition of “blight,” which was not affected by Kelo, and has been used to pursue condemnations, including in the Atlantic Yards case.
“The legal definition of blight is so absurd,” Rolley said, leading off the rally. Her web site is mainly a portal cataloging and critiquing Atlantic Yards-related news and information, though it does extend to other issues related to eminent domain.
Council Members speak
“We cannot engage in the subjective definition of blight,” James (right) declared, after leading the crowd in a chant of “Hell no, we won’t go.” “It must be based on deteriorating buildings, not just blight created by the developer. Forest City Ratner should not be rewarded.”
James said eminent domain was “stealing property for individuals in high places,” adding that “the Mayor cannot talk about [PlaNYC] 2030 and support eminent domain.” She said she hoped the Atlantic Yards case challenging eminent domain-currently pending appeal in federal appellate court-goes all the way to the Supreme Court.
“It’s probably the only time I agree with Clarence Thomas,” said the generally liberal Council Member, contrasting herself with the right-wing justice. Both are African-American.
The firebrand Barron, after criticizing eminent domain, also made reference to the special deal for Atlantic Yards inserted into the state legislature’s reform of the 421-a tax break. “If you get the information an hour before… you need to vote no,” he said.
Avella, a candidate for mayor in 2009, hearkened back to the traditional notion of eminent domain, which took homes for highways and other clear public use. “Now we’re taking private property so we can turn it over to private developers,” he said. “That is so un-American.”
(At right, Avella, with James and Barron behind him.)
Actually, it is legal-the question is whether states will narrow the powers.
Willets Point
Dan Scully of the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association (WPIRA) said that business owners had been ignored. “For 30 years, we’ve been telling the city we need sewers and we need streets. For 30 years, they’ve ignored us,” said Scully, who’s in the top photo.
WPIRA aims for “owner development” of the area. “We’re not blighted. “We’re neglected by the city,” said Scully, a vice-president at Tully Construction. (Here’s Tom Angotti’s May article, A Sustainability Test at Willets Point, from Gotham Gazette.)
Joe Ardizzone, a crusty 74-year-old who’s the only legal resident of Willets Point, declared, “It’s so un-American. It’s too much to even explain.”
(Now there’s a Coalition for Willets Point arguing for community benefits if eminent domain proceeds.)
Other voices
Nellie Hester Bailey of the Harlem Tenants Council, talking about the fight against Columbia, said, “We have to look at the elected officials who are not here today,” pointing to Mayor Bloomberg.
Ron Shiffman, founding director of the Pratt Center for Community Development and a longtime consultant to community planning groups, said, “if we want New York City to grow, the only way to do it is with a diversity of jobs, not just FIRE [Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate] but also manufacturing.”
Eminent domain, he said, must be used “only for public purpose, not to make the rich richer.” Shiffman’s on the DDDB Advisory Board.
Council Member Monserrate showed up in the middle of the event, and declared, “We should never use eminent domain to enrich others.”
(At right, Monserrate, with Rolley next to him and Bailey and Henry Weinstein, a major property owner in the Atlantic Yards footprint, behind him.)
Simeon Bankoff, executive director of the Historic Districts Council, called eminent domain “the thermonuclear warhead of city planning.”
Who’s responsible?
Joy Chatel, a Duffield Street homeowner, asked, “Governor Spitzer, where are you?” He hasn’t spoken out against eminent domain abuse.
Closing the rally, DDDB spokesman Daniel Goldstein (right) declared, “When they say it’s a public use just because they say it’s a public use, it doesn’t mean it’s a public use.” He offered the same mantra substituting the word “blight” for “public use.”
“The mayor says often, ‘you can’t let one guy’ stand in the way of development,” Goldstein continued. “We’re not ‘one guy.’”
He pointed out that eminent domain does seem to be an official policy, citing the June 2001 Group of 35 report, organized by Sen. Chuck Schumer, that identified condemnation as a tactic to assemble sites for office space.
(Note that Mayor Bloomberg made fighting federal curbs on eminent domain a priority last year; meanwhile, his law department stresses a principled approach, as with development of Melrose Commons.)
What to do
There were only a handful of reporters at the rally, plus various observers, including some from the New York City Economic Development Corporation, keeping tabs on the opposition.
At the end, with most people drenched in sweat, there was only one question: what should the legislature do?
Goldstein pointed out that bills to reform eminent domain had languished in the legislature. “When it comes to blight, we need a strong definition,” he said, suggesting that government neglect, cracked sidewalks, and underused properties-all cited or hinted at in the state’s Atlantic Yards Blight Study-should be struck in favor of “genuinely unsafe and unhealthy neighborhoods.”
“I have a joke,” he continued. “What’s the definition of blight? Yours.”
# posted by Norman Oder @ 7:10 AM
Contact: timesreport (at) hotmail.com // Info: http://tinyurl.com/al22x
http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2007/06/rally-against-eminent-domain-abuse-four.html
June 7th, 2007
Judge Rejects Main Argument of Effort to Stop Atlantic Yards Project in Brooklyn
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE Published: June 7, 2007
A federal judge yesterday dismissed the most significant lawsuit against the Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn, dealing a major setback to opponents of the $4 billion project.
The decision by the judge, Nicholas G. Garaufis of United States District Court in Brooklyn, centered on the looming condemnation of about a dozen businesses and homes to make way for the 22-acre project, which state officials approved late last year. It was among the most significant eminent domain cases to unfold since the United States Supreme Court’s much-disputed Kelo v. City of New London decision in 2005, which held that public officials may transfer condemned property to another private interest if doing so would create a superior benefit to the public.
The plaintiffs argued that any public benefit of the project was incidental, and the true purpose was to enrich the developer, Forest City Ratner Companies, and its investors.
The plaintiffs include residents and business owners who have refused to sell their properties to Forest City. They say the project originated with Forest City rather than with city and state officials, and that Forest City planners had selected the properties that needed to be condemned
But Judge Garaufis rejected their reasoning. “Plaintiffs have not set forth facts supporting a plausible claim of an unconstitutional taking,” he wrote. “Nowhere in the amended complaint or their briefs do plaintiffs sufficiently allege any purpose to confer a private benefit.” He also said any claim that the condemnations would not benefit the public were “baseless.”
Forest City has already begun preparing the property. The plans for the complex include a basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets, more than 6,000 apartments and office space. Supporters of the project say that it will generate thousands of new jobs, hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue and badly needed units of subsidized housing. The project is being overseen by the Empire State Development Corporation, which would exercise eminent domain.
In a statement, Bruce Ratner, the chief executive of Forest City, said that the decision was “an important victory not only for Atlantic Yards but for Brooklyn as well.”
Forest City Ratner Companies is also the development partner for the new Midtown headquarters for The New York Times.
The plaintiffs said they would appeal the decision. “We will continue to pursue every single legal option available to the plaintiffs, wherever they lead us, to stop what we believe is a private taking in violation of the U.S. Constitution,” said Candace Carponter, a lawyer and member of Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, a coalition of groups and individuals opposed to the project.
A federal magistrate judge had earlier recommended that the eminent domain lawsuit be dismissed from federal court on procedural grounds and moved to state court. But Judge Garaufis said the case was appropriate for federal court.
The lawsuit is not the only one associated with Atlantic Yards.
A suit filed in January by a group of tenants living in rent-stabilized apartments on the site claimed that the state’s offers to relocate them were inadequate. A separate suit by the same tenants charged that the state had failed to go through the required steps to cancel their leases. A judge ruled last month that the case had been filed in the wrong court, but a lawyer for the tenants said it would be refiled.
Still another lawsuit, filed in April, challenged the environmental impact statement that the state used in evaluating the project, on the grounds that it did not fully address the traffic and security problems the project would create.
But the case dismissed yesterday was the most significant, both for the hope opponents had invested in its potential to stop the Atlantic Yards project - the arena, for example, could not have been built at all if the case had succeeded - and for the weighty constitutional issues it raised.
Matthew D. Brinckerhoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said Judge Garaufis had erred both in his assessment of the lawsuit’s merits and in the test he chose to apply in dismissing the case. At this stage of the lawsuit, before discovery and a trial, he said, the judge should have considered whether the case could succeed if all the plaintiffs’ claims were true, rather than decide whether he thought the claims were plausible.
“Not only is what we believe plausible, but all of the evidence that is undisputed points to our conclusion being correct,” Mr. Brinckerhoff said. “And that is why we are appealing, and that is why we will win.”
Andy Newman contributed reporting.
Atlantic Yards to Get Additional Safety Monitor
Monday, May 07, 2007 | New York Daily News | Topic: General
The Empire State Development Corporation announced that a representative will be chosen to monitor demolitions within the Atlantic Yards project in order to address safety concerns after the partial collapse of a building in late April. Two other groups will have the ability to monthly review other issues, including transportation, which arise as construction goes forward. The agency hopes that together these additional measures will ensure no similar accidents and ease residents’ concerns.
Hearing Today on Atlantic Yards Law Suit
Thursday, May 03, 2007 | The Real Deal | Topic: General
The Manhattan State Supreme Court will hold a hearing today in part of a lawsuit which is attempting to throw out the Atlantic Yards Environmental Impact Statement as inadequate. The lawsuit was filed by Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn and 25 other petitioners approximately one month ago. The lawsuit is one of several againt the project which are still pending.
Pending DOB Review, Atlantic Yards Demolition on Halt
Friday, April 27, 2007 | Crain’s New York Business | Topic: Politics & Government
Both the state’s Empire State Development Corp. (ESDC) and Atlantic Yards developer, Forest City Ratner, have agreed to temporarily cease demolition following the collapse of a parapet at the Ward Bakery on Thursday. No work on the site will continue until the city’s Department of Buildings (DOB) conducts a formal investigation of what caused the collapse. While project opponents used the instance to highlight the project’s harm to the community, the developer used the occasion to emphasize that Governor Spitzer’s Administration is supportive of the project. A Spitzer spokesperson reiterated that the governor was interested in ensuring that all project stakeholders are satisfied during the plan’s implementation.
Demolition Collapse at Atlantic Yards Pressures Governor to Act
Friday, April 27, 2007 | Brooklyn Papers | Topic: Politics & Government
A coalition of public officials, including members of the City Council both supportive and opposed to the Atlantic Yards project, are asking Governor Spitzer to put a formal halt to the demolition process in the wake of an unforeseen partial collapse of one of the buildings in the footprint. In response to the demolition accident, the city’s Department of Buildings issued a violation against developer Forest City Ratner. The state’s Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) issued a public statement claiming that Ratner had agreed to halt the asbestos removal work on the site that caused the partial collapse. Opponents of the $4.2 billion plan continue to argue that the current demolition is premature given pending legal suits.
Re-Zoning to Preserve Low-Scale Brownstones in Brooklyn
Wednesday, April 25, 2007 | Brooklyn Eagle | Topic: Land Use
The Brooklyn Daily Eagle is reporting that the Department of City Planning is ready to begin a formal public review process of a rezoning plan for a large area of the Fort Green and Clinton Hill neighborhoods of Brooklyn. The rezoning would establish height limits in the range of three to five stories that would “protect the character of the low-rise, brownstone neighborhoods.” According to Amanda Burden, the head of City Planning, the rezoning will not restrict the development of affordable housing on account of the “city’s groundbreaking inclusionary housing program.” The rezone bounds Park Avenue (northern boundary), Atlantic Avenue (southern), Classon Avenue (eastern), and Ashland Place (western). Many maintain that the up-scale nature of the Atlantic Yards plans inspired the rezoning. Forest City Ratner, developer of the Atlantic Yards project, has foregone traditional city zoning procedure for his project.
