Skip to main content

Errol Louis: a defense of MetroTech, weak math, and the walls of the ghetto

Errol Louis, in his August 1 column in the black-oriented Our Time Press, continues his staunch support for the Atlantic Yards project, his badmouthing of opponents, and his casual relationship to facts.

The first segment of his Commerce and Community column is headlined Endgame at Atlantic Yards. I've already discussed some errors in both this column and his most-recent Daily News column, but some choice lines still deserve response.

Eminent domain

He writes:
As die-hard opponents of eminent domain, which is the government’s power to compel holdouts to sell their property at fair market value to benefit the public good, the antidevelopment groups would have opposed the redevelopment of Times Square, the creation of Lincoln Center, the hundreds of units of affordable housing created by the Melrose Commons Project in the Bronx and the Nehemiah Homes in East New York.

Opinions about eminent domain differ, but the important thing is to analyze the Supreme Court's Kelo decision, which raises major questions about whether use of eminent domain is legitimate if there has been no public planning process and it favors a specific developer.

MetroTech

Louis defends Forest City Ratner's MetroTech:
The antibuilders would also have opposed the creation of MetroTech – many of them not knowing, as newcomers to Brooklyn, that in the mid-1980s half of the buildings near Polytechnic University were in poor condition, and that 17% of the buildings in the area were vacant and another 22% of the area was made up of vacant lots and parking lots. No buildings had been constructed in the area for 20 years.
Thanks to a billion in private investment dollars and use of eminent domain by the city, the MetroTech area now has more than 22,000 jobs and eliminated a major crime zone. That, in turn, made it possible for the wave of new apartment buildings now scheduled to be built east of Flatbush Avenue near the Manhattan Bridge.


Louis doesn't mention that large public subsidies were required--justified, in the city's mind, to keep Wall Street firms from migrating offices to New Jersey.

He leaves out a major beneficiary of those subsidies: Forest City Ratner. In fact, in his entire column, he doesn't mention the name of the Atlantic Yards developer.

As for the jobs at MetroTech, Louis is quite selective. Many of those white-collar jobs were retained, not created, and as Matthew Schuerman wrote last year in City Limits:
Seventeen years later, while the buildings are still enjoying a property-tax holiday, no one knows how many low-income residents of adjoining neighborhoods are working at the complex. But business leaders and community activists agree that the number is very low.

The CBA defense

Louis writes:
Meanwhile, groups and local leaders with deep roots in our community and knowledge of the area’s past have been fighting the good fight, trying to ensure that jobs, contracts and housing will be created and distributed fairly as Atlantic Yards moves forward. Thanks to organizations like ACORN and leaders like the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, Freddie Hamilton and James Caldwell – people whose long track records and integrity have been maliciously attacked by the anti-development yuppies – a package of legally binding promises has been negotiated.

Malicious attacked? Is it malicious to point out, yet again, that in Los Angeles, where Community Benefits Agreements were pioneered, signatories don't take money from developers, but in Brooklyn, they do? (Or is it myopic for the press to ignore this?)

Is the Rev. David Dyson of Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian Church an anti-development yuppie? He's the longstanding social activist who told Norman Kelley of the Brooklyn Rail last year:
This project has actually split lifelong partners in the progressive movement. We feel that Reverend Daughtry and ACORN have been brought in by Ratner not as advocates for the community but as private business partners in the deal. We’re trying to prevent the misuse of eminent domain, trying to increase the number of affordable housing units, trying to decrease the number of high-rise luxury office buildings. Those are the kinds of issues that a community group should have, but the Reverend Daughtry—who’s also an old friend—and our friends at ACORN are trying to cut a personal deal so that they can be brokers over whatever little piece or crumb of this pie falls from Ratner’s table. Ratner has been to Brooklyn what Karl Rove was to Ohio and Florida—brilliantly able to play on people’s worst instincts in order to get what he wants in a way that he wants it.

Louis's math

He writes:
Do the math: if even 3% of the contracts and jobs from the proposed $4.2 billion project ends up in local hands, it will mean $126 million for a community in desperate need of revitalization. And the creation of 2,250 subsidized apartments, 900 of which would be affordable to the very poorest New Yorkers, will be a priceless benefit.

Louis neatly conflates "minority businesses" and "local hands." As noted, many of the minority businesses that have benefited from the CBA aren't even in Brooklyn.

A New York Times article published today describes Forest City Ratner and its partner, Turner Construction, helped organize a special eight-week instruction program company for small, minority-run contractors. The three examples cited:
--a Pakistani immigrant (male) who lives on Long Island and runs a subsidiary of a firm based in Long Island City, Queens
--a Chinese immigrant (male) who manages a firm based in Queens
--a Harlem woman who runs her small company out of her apartment.

The program may be worthy, but it doesn't seem to have much to do with the Central Brooklyn ghetto Louis cites later in his column.

Looking at the housing

Louis writes that 900 apartments would be "affordable to the very poorest New Yorkers."

Actually, even the most affordable apartments planned for the Atlantic Yards project would go to families earning between $21,270 and $28,360. The city has just announced a plan to offer affordable housing to "very hard to reach" populations, including those earning below $21,250.

No feasible plan

Louis writes:
The antidevelopment crowd, which has attacked the benefits agreement as inadequate, has no feasible plan to create more jobs or more affordable housing than the Atlantic Yards planners. In fact, they have only promised to try and stop the project in court.

This is a neat trick. He's blaming the "antidevelopment crowd" for not having a plan, while the way to create a plan is to send out a request for proposals, which is what the city and state do for many, many other sites.

Remember, the city made no effort to launch a plan involving the MTA's Vanderbilt Yard in Brooklyn. But now the city wants to buy rights to the MTA's Hudson Yards in Manhattan, build a platform, and solicit bids from developers.

Guarding the walls

Louis closes:
But it’s too early to celebrate: New York has a long history of worthy projects that have been stalled or killed by small groups of middle-class people with loud voices and access to the media. Many of them are liberal, but they still end up serving as sentries guarding the walls of the Central Brooklyn ghetto, keeping people bottled up inside with too few jobs, too little income and not enough affordable housing.
That’s why it’s so important for ordinary people to understand what’s at stake and to show up at the August 23 hearing.


If only Louis looked a little more carefully, he might tell his readers that, for example, there would be an average of 41 two- and three- bedroom apartments per year for people who otherwise could qualify for Section 8 vouchers or public housing.

And he might read the DEIS and conclude that the document, despite itself, warns that displacement would be a problem and that this project might, in its own way, shore up the walls of the ghetto.

Comments

  1. "As die-hard opponents of eminent domain, which is the government’s power to compel holdouts to sell their property at fair market value to benefit the public good, the antidevelopment groups would have opposed the redevelopment of Times Square, the creation of Lincoln Center, the hundreds of units of affordable housing created by the Melrose Commons Project in the Bronx and the Nehemiah Homes in East New York."

    Comparing AY to these projects is like comparing apples and oranges. The Times Square redevelopment was in a 100% commercial space so it made sense. Also the affordable housing he mentions in the Bronx and East New York were redevelopments in a 100% residential space so it made sense.

    But his use of the Lincoln Center project shows his immense ignorance. Thousands of poor and low income minorities (including black, spanish and eastern european) were forced out of the West side because of the Lincoln Center deal. And thousands of units of housing that was destroyed was never replaced, although many of the developers "promised" that they would build more housing. In fact 90% of the housing that was destroyed during New York's Urban Renewal years (approx. 1945-1970) was never replaced. One of the reasons why New York is one of the most expensive places to live is because of a lack of adequate, affordable housing. Why? Developers like Ratner will condemn 2000 units of middle income housing to put up 600 units of "luxury" housing, disguising these types of projects as "benefits to the community". Its probably the most successful scam in the history of civil planning.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…

Former ESDC CEO Lago returns to NYC to head City Planning Commission

Carl Weisbrod, Mayor Bill de Blasio's City Planning Commission Chairman and Director of the Department of City Planning, is resigning,

And he's being replaced by Marisa Lago, currently a federal official, but who Atlantic Yards-ologists remember as the short-term Empire State Development Corporation CEO who, in an impolitic but candid 2009 statement, acknowledged that the project would take "decades."

Still, Lago not long after that played the good soldier at a May 2009 Senate oversight hearing, justifying changes in the project but claiming the public benefits remained the same.

By returning to City Planning, Lago will join former ESDC General Counsel Anita Laremont, who after retiring from the state (and taking a pension) got the job with the city.

Back at planning

Lago, a lawyer, in 1983 began work as an aide to City Planning Chairman Herb Sturz, and later served as the General Counsel to the president of the NYC Economic Development Corporation, Weisbrod himself.