Skip to main content

"Brooklyn Matters" on eminent domain

The “Brooklyn Matters” film screened Thursday offers opponents a forum to argue against the use of eminent domain for the Atlantic Yards project.

“Eminent domain is the government taking your property for a public purpose,” declares Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB) attorney Jeff Baker in the film. “Say you want to build a highway, and your house is in the way. Say you want to build a park, and your house is in the way. You need to create low-income rental housing, which is the traditional urban renewal housing that we had in the 60s and the 50s that everybody’s familiar with. You could do that. The difference here is where you are taking private property, and your public purpose may be a little bit of affordable housing, but it’s also primarily, and significantly, more private housing, private market-rate housing, or private economic development. That is what is less appropriate.”

Film director Isabel Hill cuts from some of the talking heads to a shot of Patti and Schellie Hagan, sisters at the heart of the Prospect Heights Action Coalition, painting an anti-eminent domain sign on a wall in Prospect Heights. Schellie Hagan steadies the ladder; Patti Hagan, who’s over 60, perches not on the ladder’s top rung but on its apex. A strong wind could tumble her to the ground. She’s either fearless, reckless, or unusually even-keeled--or some combination of the three.

MAS concern

Then we hear Kent Barwick of the Municipal Art Society, which as part of BrooklynSpeaks has treaded a careful line about eminent domain, criticizing it but not considering it a reason to oppose the project.

In the film, however, Barwick offers a quote that the DDDB hard-liners could embrace: “It’s my property, you can’t take it away. If you take it away for a defense plant or a hospital, that’s one thing, but taking it away from me and giving it to some developer down the street who’s going to make more money off the property than I was able to make, that doesn’t sit well with people.”

The Kelo case

DDDB's Baker offers the rationale for the suit challenging eminent domain, based on the language of the Supreme Court’s 2005 Kelo decision: “What makes it legally flawed and politically flawed was that there never was organic planning by the state or the MTA for the Vanderbilt Yards to say how do we change these process… Finally, after it was well along with the process, endorsed by the governor and the mayor, the MTA put out an RFP for Vanderbilt Yards."

"Friendly condemnations"

Planner Ron Shiffman, who's on the DDDB advisory board, adds that, “To take property owned by the developer and take it by eminent domain to resell it to the private developer so that he can avoid the rent protections, is an outrage, and this is what they’re doing. They are planning to take some of the properties where Ratner cannot evict the families, or cannot negotiate a settlement, they very well use eminent domain to take that property from Ratner so that he doesn’t have to live up to his obligations under rent control or rent stabilization laws of the state. That no only jeopardizes the families living there, it jeopardizes every other family living in some form of rent protection in the city and the state of New York.”

These "friendly condemnations" are the subject of a lawsuit filed by 13 rent-stabilized tenants.

Blight questions

The ostensible aim of the eminent domain proceeding is to remove blight, a highly contested issue. Shiffman adds, “The real blighting influence is the property owned by MTA. When you look at the blight report, however, consultants who were brought in basically said that, because there were so many different property owners, that it was difficult to assemble and therefore hard for any large-scale development project to be undertaken here. That’s not a definition of blight. If that’s a definition of blight, then the block you live on, the block I live on, the block many families in Brooklyn live on, could all be considered blight because they’re in multiple ownership.”

More arguments coming

The arguments against eminent domain are forceful, but will they stand up in court? The contested issues in the eminent domain case--questions of public purposes, blight, and deference to the decision of a legislatively-created agency--are currently the subject of some clashing legal memoranda. On January 19, they'll be argued publicly in federal court.

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.