Skip to main content

Cops closemouthed about incident at Atlantic Terminal during May 3 rally

So what exactly happened on May 3, when police at the plaza outside the Forest City Ratner-owned Atlantic Terminal mall, where Atlantic Yards supporters were gathering for a quietly organized counter-protest to the "Time Out" rally scheduled by AY opponents, decided to bar a photographer with a camera and a journalist with a pen?

I haven't gotten any clear answers from the New York Police Department (NYPD). Given that another rally--albeit on public property, rather than publicly accessible open space controlled by Forest City Ratner--will be held tomorrow, those answers are worth knowing.

[June 7 update: see explanation from NYPD regarding part of the incident.]

Vague explanation, not-vague order

As I wrote, when I arrived at the plaza, photographer Adrian Kinloch, his camera visible, was finding himself stalemated by cops, who said that “the person in charge” did not permit photos. I said I was there only to take notes and talk to people, but was quickly told I had to leave.

Though I asked for more of an explanation, Sgt. Jones of the 77th Precinct (right) said he didn’t have time to provide one, and forcefully but not roughly gripped my arm and walked me across the street. Kinloch got a picture.

Checking with the cops

I wanted more of an explanation, so I called the 77th Precinct the next morning. The staffer on the phone questioned whether an incident at the mall, which is just to the north of precinct boundaries, would have involved police from the 77th. I said he could check the picture. He said he had no Internet access.

An hour later I got a call from a detective in the precinct's Community Affairs office, who expressed similar skepticism. I suggested that it was not unreasonable for police from the 77th to have been involved, given that the group eventually moved to Vanderbilt Avenue and Pacific Street, which is within precinct boundaries (see X marked at right).

Two days later, I hand-delivered a print copy of my blog article and a letter to the precinct, asking several specific questions: why this happened, whether the sergeant was acting appropriately and, if such a situation again presents itself, how to proceed.

The detective I'd spoken to had finally seen my blog and confirmed that the sergeant was from the precinct. I was hoping that precinct brass might give me some answers informally or pass on my queries to an official spokesman.

Escalating the query

A day later, I contacted the NYPD press office and asked, more specifically: Was I removed from the plaza because I was there as a journalist? Was he removing me because I was clearly not part of the groups demonstrating? On whose authority was he acting--the precinct? the owner of the mall?

I got a brief response a day later: "A preliminary investigation found no police misconduct."

Beyond misconduct

Maybe so, but that struck me as a rather narrow response. I reiterated my questions and also asked whether the plaza's role as "publicly-accessible private space" played any role in the incident.

In other words, had it been purely public space, would it have made any difference? Is it the job of police or private security guards to first enforce regulations regarding private space? Were the police acting on behalf of the mall owner and substituting for private security guards?

That issue is important because Forest City Ratner controls other publicly-accessible private space, notably the Commons at MetroTech. And while the developer has pledged that the open space at Atlantic Yards--all to be delivered in Phase 2 of the project, which has no timeline--would be managed by a conservancy or not-for-profit entity, that still raises questions about what would be permitted. Similar questions could be raised about the civic space promised in the Urban Room.

No answer

I've sent two follow-up email messages and left one phone message. I haven't gotten a response. But the questions linger: what exactly were the cops doing, and on whose request were they acting?

Comments

  1. keep investigating. You are really doing a great service to our community. Keep up the good work

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am going to take a ballpark guess and say that as far as the law goes, you were on public property. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck... that's how the courts are going to size it up as far as first amendment privileges go.

    But I am not an expert and I'd urge you to consult with the NYCLU, which will both assist you in getting answers from NYPD and clarifying the legal questions.

    On a day when the NYPD illegally covered up a controversial piece of art (see the Times), your questions are extremely important. Please keep pursuing them.

    And it's just outrageous that these officers seem to be catering to the whims of a private company.

    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.