Skip to main content

Some on appellate court skeptical of ESDC in AY relocation case

While on September 26, a state appellate court appeared unsympathetic to a challenge to the state’s demolition plans posed by rent-regulated tenants of two buildings in the Atlantic Yards footprint, this morning some on another appellate court seemed more sympathetic to the same 13 plaintiffs as they challenged the state’s plan to find them new housing.

The state has promised to provide, at minimum, the services of a real estate broker, moving assistance, and a $5000 payment—but that, attorney George Locker argued, will hardly guarantee similarly affordable housing. (Of the 13 plaintiffs at 624 Pacific Street and 473 Dean Street, 12 have rent-stabilized leases, and many pay rents that are $500-$600. The case is known as Matter of Anderson v. New York State Urban Development Corp.)

“Isn’t it reasonable to assume there is some comparable housing” in Brooklyn, asked Justice Robert Spolzino, who was the most skeptical among the four-judge panel of the Appellate Division, Second Department, during the oral argument, which lasted less than 20 minutes.

Locker said it wasn’t. He said state law directs the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) to offer those displaced accommodation into the project, but has not made any offer to his clients. (Actually, state law says the ESDC should do so if "feasible.")

What's documented

Indeed, one issue raised in court was whether a reference to an offer in an ESDC document was sufficient proof of that offer. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) indicates that developer Forest City Ratner has “agreed to pay the difference, if any, in rent between the tenant's current rent and the rent for the comparable interim unit until such time as the tenant is relocated into a new unit in the proposed development.”

However, that hasn’t been offered to Locker’s clients and it would expire—meaning the loss of a precious rent-stabilized lease—if the project were abandoned or the tenant breached obligations in the deal.

A previous case, known as Fisher, upheld a similar relocation plan, and Justice Thomas Dickerson asked Locker why it shouldn’t stand. Locker said the underlying facts of the case differed, and the case, which the plaintiffs argued without a lawyer, was not fully briefed.

The statute, Locker said, says “provide housing,” and “they’ve put the burden on the site tenants to find housing that doesn’t exist.” With a plan of referrals, he said, “you have to know something about the market. It’s an illusory plan. Illusory plans are unlawful plans.”

What the law says

The law establishing the Urban Development Corporation (scroll down to Urban Development Corporation Act 174/68), now known as the ESDC, requires "that there is a feasible method for the relocation of families and individuals displaced from the project area into decent, safe and sanitary dwellings, which are or will be provided in the project area or in other areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities, at rents or prices within the financial means of such families or individuals, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Insofar as is feasible, the corporation shall offer housing accommodations to such families and individuals in residential projects of the corporation. The corporation may render to … families or other persons displaced from the project area, such assistance as it may deem necessary to enable them to relocate.”

Defense case

ESDC attorney Charles Webb confidently said Fisher is on point, but then ran into some tough questions. “What are you doing for these tenants?” asked Dickerson.

Webb detailed the package.

“How can your plan be feasible if you don’t know what there is available?” asked Spolzino, who was appointed by former Gov. George Pataki, an Atlantic Yards backer.

Webb said the issue is what housing is available at the time the tenants are required to move, and that has happened yet.

Spolzino was skeptical, pointing out that the Atlantic Yards environmental review makes assumptions about the future. He asked why the state didn’t look at the availability of alternative housing.

The statute, Webb said, doesn’t require it.

Justice Fred Santucci asked whether offers to reside in the project had been made.

“To most of the people,” Webb responded, though it was unclear whether he meant the plaintiffs or simply most of those living in the footprint who have already relocated or are expected to do so. (Locker said afterward that “we have received no relocation offers as represented.")

Relocation agreement?

Spolzino asked where it was in the record. Webb said an agreement was described in the Atlantic Yards General Project Plan, though that didn’t indicate the document itself was included.

The General Project Plan states:
All existing residential occupants within the Project Site, who are legally occupying a residential dwelling unit, shall be provided with relocation assistance to find decent, safe and sanitary dwellings, in the project area or in other areas not generally less desirable, at rents or prices within the financial means of the displaced person(s).

It also references the Community Benefits Agreement, which offers those in residence at least one year “the right to return and to rent a comparable unit within the Project Site at a comparable rate to what they are currently paying.”

“I couldn’t find it, frankly, in the record,” Spolzino continued. “Is there a signed agreement with the developer and ESDC?”

Webb said yes.

Spolzino asked where it was.

Webb indicated that it’s in the record.

“With all due respect, I don’t have time to go through the record,” Spolzino continued.

Webb conferred with co-counsel Philip Karmel, also representing the ESDC. “I’ll have to furnish it to the court later,” Webb said.

Challenge now, or later?

Webb recovered a bit, repeating a point made in the briefs: when it comes to condemnation, a judge at that time can evaluate whether the ESDC is complying with the law.

Spolzino wasn’t sure. He said the law doesn’t give the ESDC the authority to proceed uniless it has in place a “feasible plan” for relocation: “The argument is, in the absence of a study, no plan can be feasible. You rely in part on the existence of an agreement with the developer, but we can’t find that agreement in the record.”

Karmel said that various documents in the record do describe the agreement.

Spolzino still wasn’t sure. If the developer doesn’t fulfill the plan as promised, do the tenants, he asked, have legal recourse?

A lawsuit could be brought against the ESDC, Karmel said.

“Not against the developer?” Spolzino asked.

“Correct,” Karmel replied.

What's feasible?

“If they have no recourse against the developer, how can we consider the developer’s offer as helping establish a feasible plan?” Spolzino asked.

“I don’t think it’s illusory,” Karmel replied. “It needs to be implemented in accordance with the documents.”

Santucci asked if there was an obligation to relocate all the tenants or just assist them.

“The obligation is a 'feasible' plan,” Karmel said, citing Fisher. “There’s millions of apartments in New York City. If these people don’t have a place to move, the condemnation judge is not going to kick them out of their apartments.” It’s premature, he said, to ask for more specifics.

Spolzino said he wasn’t talking about a specific apartment. “It’s that you had to do some study.”

"There’s thousands of housing units in Brooklyn,” said Karmel, noting that “the project sponsor has agreed to pay the difference in rent.”

And that was it; Locker tried to make one more point but was waved off.

Afterward, the lawyers and officials representing the ESDC and Forest City Ratner looked glum, even though one particularly skeptical judge, Spolzino, does not necessarily represent the whole panel.

Locker was more optimistic. As for the specific agreement to pay the difference in rent, referenced by Karmel, he said, “It’s not in the record. I’ve never seen it.”

Project logjam?

This case is the only one formally blocking the ESDC from moving to condemn properties, even though it’s likely the agency wouldn’t proceed against plaintiffs in the pending federal eminent domain case (oral argument Tuesday) until it’s resolved.

Indeed, the ESDC says that Locker’s challenge to the state’s determination and findings, under the Eminent Domain Procedure Law, is a challenge to the entire project, not merely the two buildings.


  1. The one thing every lawyer knows is that Judge questioning generally is not a good predictor as to what the decision will be. The fact that they had some compassion for the tenants is a good thing because it helps their mindset but generally unfortunately when they decide, it doesn't translate to the decision.

    Sid Meyer

  2. Can someone explain to me this. If Bertha Lewis and Acorn is so interested in "affordable' housing, why then didn't they come publicly to the defense of these tenants. Yes, this is a rhetorical question. But I would like to hear from others.


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…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

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…