Skip to main content

"Atlantic Yards win by a mile"? The evidence isn't there

In a Daily News editorial yesterday, headlined Atlantic Yards win by a mile (and immediately promoted on the Atlantic Yards web site, right, and via an e-newsletter) claimed:
To the runaway victories of Eliot Spitzer and Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night, add one more landslide: The Atlantic Yards project planned for Brooklyn was a huge winner at the polls.
Whether to build the $4.2 billion housing and office complex in Prospect Heights along with an arena for the pro-basketball Nets, was a central issue in five congressional and state races. Candidates who back the development won in four of the contests - and the fifth went to one of Albany's impregnable incumbents.


Actually, the results are more murky than claimed. Yes, opponents of the project failed in their efforts to establish a referendum against the project. However, support for Atlantic Yards was not a main factor in most of the victories, and the turnout was quite low.

And there's some counter-evidence, as well. Just this week, Community Board 6, representing an area on and beyond the southern border of the proposed Atlantic Yards site, voted overwhelmingly to oppose the plan in its current form. The other two community boards, CB2 and CB8, also are expected to vote on AY.

(At right, boundaries of 57th Assembly District, with proposed Atlantic Yards site in red.)

Congressional races

The editorial stated:
In the most high-profile race, Yards supporter Councilwoman Yvette Clarke won Shirley Chisholm's old congressional seat over three rivals. Only one opposed the project, and he came in last. The pro-development field pulled in more than 80% of the vote.
Rep. Ed Towns beat Councilman Charles Barron, who hammered the development.


Clarke won with fewer than 15,000 votes, in a race that got 18% of registered Democrats, and her web site doesn't even mention Atlantic Yards. (Neither did the sites for David Yassky, whose posture was positive but measured, and Carl Andrews.) As noted, Clarke's strength came from women, voters of Caribbean descent, and the unions backing her.

Barron got 38% of the vote against an 24-year incumbent, and was outspent by a margin of more than 9 to 1 (as of Aug. 23). Without the dubious participation of Atlantic Yards supporter Roger Green, who had no chance but took votes away from Barron, Towns would have been in even more danger. Towns's web site doesn't mention Atlantic Yards.

It's not clear that Barron's voters were necessarily motivated by the Atlantic Yards issue--he's been quite visible as a Councilman, but his web site does mention his stand on AY. Then again, there's little evidence that Towns's votes came because of his support for Atlantic Yards.

State races

The Daily News editorial stated:
State Sen. Marty Connor, a booster, decisively defeated anti-project gadfly Ken Diamondstone, who spent more than $265,000 of his own money on his campaign.

Here's another way to look at it. Connor, a veteran of 28 years, got only 55% of the vote. Still, as I pointed out, Diamondstone's totals probably have more to do with the money he spent than the Atlantic Yards issue.

(Above, May 2006 ad from Hakeem Jeffries in the Brooklyn Downtown Star.)

The editorial said:
And Bill Batson, a former union staffer who ran a single-issue, anti-development campaign for the Assembly, got creamed - 64% to 25% - by Hakeem Jeffries, who favors Atlantic Yards. Jeffries won 105 of the 109 election districts in the race.

Yes Jeffries earned a much higher percentage of the votes, but he had a much longer history among voters, had at least three times as much money as Batson, had union and ACORN support, and his total of 5770 was only 2359 more votes than he earned in 2002. He earned votes from 9.6% of the Democrats in the 57th district.

Jeffries says he didn't change his position. Perhaps, but he certainly changed his promotion of his position, from a cautious text ad in the spring to one, as the election approached, with dramatic graphics and language. (Note that ad at right is augmented with box at the bottom.)

It's a victory, but it's hardly a definitive sign of Atlantic Yards support. After all, Freddie Hamilton, an unabashed supporter of the project, won only 1008 votes. A "win by a mile" would have carried Hamilton to the top. Rather, undecided voters might have voted for Jeffries based on his advertised call to scale down the project, fight eminent domain, and delay the deliberations.

Did Jeffries ask constituents for support based on his Atlantic Yards stand? It wasn't one of his campaign planks, or even on his web site.

And what about Boyland?

The Daily News editorial said:
Only entrenched incumbent Sen. Velmanette Montgomery managed to survive as a Yards foe.

Note the distorted language here. While Connor, according to the editorial, "decisively defeated" Diamondstone, he got only 55% of the vote. By contrast, Montgomery "managed to survive" but earned 65% of the vote.

It's disappointing that the newspaper took a swipe at Montgomery rather than her law-evading challenger, Tracy Boyland, who still has reported only $100 in spending. Apparently the zeal to promote the project took precedence over the importance of serving as a civic watchdog.

The polls

The editorial concludes:
Add these election results to recent polls, and the result is the same: A solid majority of Brooklynites want the thousands of jobs and affordable-housing units that are included in Atlantic Yards. And the opponents have revealed themselves, once again, to be a small but vocal group that uses press conferences, blogs and bluster to disguise thin support in the neighborhoods they so often claim to represent.

First, a solid majority of Brooklynites didn't vote.

The Crain's poll, as I've argued, was deeply inadequate. As for the depth of the opposition and support, that's hard to measure. What if the poll had asked different questions? What if a deep-pocketed backer (like Cablevision in the West Side Stadium controversy) amplified community concerns? What if the New York Times editorial page didn't feel any pressure to support a project by the parent company's business partner?

Hardly any Atlantic Yards supporters attended the Atlantic Yards community forum Tuesday, and most were union representatives obligated to be there (and who live outside the city). Couldn't that be seen as an absence of support for the project? (Or was it just the flip side of the opposition boycott?)

Informing the public

What if the newspapers had printed graphics that show the project's astounding scale, relative to its neighbors? (Rendering by Jonathan Barkey.) What if any daily newspaper had followed up on the state's untenable claim that the project would bring $1.4 billion in benefits?

Most people polled by Crain's said they weren't following Atlantic Yards closely, and those who did so were more likely to have negative views (though their numbers grew by cutting into the undecideds rather than those positive toward AY).

There are all kinds of ways to shape opinion about this project, but it's safe to say that most people remain underinformed--and most people didn't vote.

Comments

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.