Skip to main content

It's Orwellian, almost: the Courier-Life's Witt salutes a heckler's veto and wrongly claims DDDB sought ministers' "protection"

The Courier-Life's notorious Stephen Witt this week offers not just an undiscerning round-up article on the first day of the Atlantic Yards hearing.

He also pens an "Orwellian, almost" sidebar in which he gives pro-project hecklers an implicit endorsement and wrongly states that Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn asked a couple of black ministers for "protection." (A new reporter--or intern?--also shares the byline.)

The round-up

The round-up article is headlined online as Atlantic Yards meeting brings out supporters and opponents. In print the main headline is "From out of the woodwork," which implies that those supporters and opponents have been laying low. Not exactly.

He writes:
The $4 billion, 22-acre project starting at the Atlantic/Flatbush Avenues intersection proposed by developer Forest City Ratner (FCR) includes an arena to house the NBA’s Nets franchise and at least one mixed-income residential building in the first phase.

Actually, it's a $4.9 billion project now.

But give Witt credit for acknowledging that the initial phase could have just one tower. But he didn't connect the dots: all the people anticipating housing won't get their wish if only one tower is built.

Supporters outnumber opponents

Witt writes:
Once again, as has been the case in almost every hearing regarding the project since it was announced in 2003,supporters of the project far outnumbered opponents...

There's another way of putting it: representatives of groups that gain financial benefit (direct or indirect) from Forest City Ratner or expect work on the project far outnumbered opponents.

We know Witt disdains Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn. But he didn't see fit to mention that five elected officials, under the banner of BrooklynSpeaks, asked for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). That's simply journalistic negligence.

Note that the caption states: Outnumbered opponents of the Atlantic Yards project were on hand at an Empire State Development Corporation hearing on the issue.

In print, the caption is attached to a photo of opponents. On the web--see screenshot at left--that caption is attached to a photo of proponents. That's not atypical Courier-Life quality control. (Click on graphics to enlarge)

Supporters

Community activist Albert C. Wiltshire also supported the project. “Atlantic Yards represents enormous job growth for the 10th district,” said Wiltshire. “We cannot let this opportunity pass us by.”

Wiltshire isn't just a community activist. He's chief of staff to Rep. Ed Towns--hence the mention of the 10th District. And Towns has received campaign contributions from people connected to Forest City Ratner.

“We are not asking for a handout, we’re just asking for an opportunity,” said Kareiff McDuffy, a neighborhood resident.

Actually, McDuffie (note spelling) also offered a veiled threat: "You want a better community--you have to give these kids a reason to kids to get off the street. I can’t tell that brother to stop robbing, I can’t tell that brother to stop selling drugs.”

“There is simply not enough housing in Brooklyn and we need more affordable housing,” said [Laurie] Waldron. “We want housing and we want jobs. It’s simply a no-brainer.”

Is it a no-brainer if only one tower gets built? And isn't ACORN a bit suspect, given that they're in hock to Forest City Ratner? Also, while "Laurie Waldron" is described as a "former ACORN member," I suspect the person quoted was actually Gloria Waldron, a former ACORN president. (Why would a former member testify on behalf of an organization she'd left?)

Even Mill Basin Assemblymember Alan Maisel came out to show his support of the development project.

Even Maisel? The news is not that Maisel came out, it's that the elected officials who showed up have gained financial support from the developer and have longtime ties to FCR VP Bruce Bender.

Opponents

Witt writes:
On the opponent side, Raul Rothblatt from the block association representing Prospect Heights and Underhill claimed that there was no account of the number of subsidies that will create jobs.

“The ESDC will not answer our questions,” declared Rothblatt.


Well, is that an unfounded claim or not?

Many complaints stemmed from how the ESDC is allegedly withholding the development plans. One speaker called for the full release of project documentation by the ESDC.

One speaker? Many speakers said the information was inadequate. That's what the five elected officials said, in tandem with BrooklynSpeaks.

Ginning up a conflict

As for the sidebar, the headline on the Courier-Life web site, at least over the weekend, was "AY opponents seek protection from the community," with the implication that Atlantic Yards opponents are not the community.

That headline now matches that used in print (top): AY opponents look to black leaders for help. (Update: the original headline still exists, as well: AY opponents seek protection from the community.)


Except it's bogus.

Given that black leaders like City Council Member Letitia James and state Senator Velmanette Montgomery are the most prominent political opponents of Atlantic Yards, the headline falsely suggests that there are no black leaders involved.

Sure, there are black leaders who support the project, but the most visible lead groups that are signatories to the AY Community Benefits Agreement. At the hearing last week, the only elected officials Forest City could muster, in person, were white: state Senators Carl Kruger and Marty Golden, Assemblyman Alan Maisel, and City Council Member Eric Ulrich. All come from parts of Brooklyn distant from the project, or even Queens. The only pro-AY black elected official to testify, via a surrogate, was Towns.

Call for protection?

The article begins:
Following several raucous meetings concerning the Atlantic Yards project, opponents have put out the call for protection.

One knowledgeable source said that Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB), the main organization fighting the project, has spoken to at least two prominent ministers recently in the African− and Caribbean−American community to see if they could get some of their people out to future meetings who oppose the project.


As noted in the article, DDDB contradicts that. DDDB's Daniel Goldstein told me, "We informed Reverend [Clinton] Miller about the ESDC hearing and invited him to come--along with individuals in the rest of Brooklyn affected by this phantom project. As we've done in the past we asked him if he would announce the hearing in his church--we've worked with Reverend Miller and other clergy for many years now. We did not make a new or special effort."

"DDDB did not ask for protection from anyone," he added.

Miller told me that his impetus for bringing a group (ultimately 23 men) came not from DDDB but from a community member who attended the May 29 state Senate oversight hearing at the Pratt Institute, located not far from his Brown Memorial Baptist Church.

The crowd, he was told, had disrespected elected officials. (Union members blew whistles and others in construction garb, associated with groups like ReBUILD, regularly heckled.) "I had seen the politics of intimidation" in 2006, Miller said, and wanted to neutralize that going forward. (Here's video of the invite he offered his congregation.)

Later, Miller said, he encountered Goldstein at a birthday party for Rev. Dennis Dillon (who chairs DDDB's board), and asked when the next public meeting would be.

Jobs trump decorum

Witt writes:
The call comes out after a large and vocal contingent of African−Americans and construction union members, desperately in need of jobs, have shouted down the opponents, who are largely white. at two recent meetings...

Witt is basically endorsing a heckler's veto. At the July 22 meeting, the proponents actually derailed a question by chanting "Go Home." If people need jobs, does that mean they should interfere with a public meeting or does that mean that the government and civic officials in charge of the meeting should keep order? The heckling was clearly tolerated by Forest City Ratner.

Among the accusations being hurled against the opponents are that they are fairly new to the neighborhood, and in some cases gentrified the neighborhood in housing that was once factories with jobs.

Why does Witt take these accusations seriously? Some people are new to the neighborhood--whatever the boundaries--and some have been there for a while. And what exactly is wrong with renovating closed, obsolete factories into housing--after all, Forest City Enterprises does it periodically.

Channeling Rev. Daughtry

The next section of the article appears to have been inspired by the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, who interrupted the May 29 state Senate oversight hearing with regular heckling, including "They're blocking the program, with these complicated questions."

Witt writes:
Additionally, the hecklers note that opponents, who number a few dozen at most at the meetings, continually ask the same questions to stall the project while people in the nearby public housing developments are crying out for the jobs and small business opportunities the project may bring.

The hecklers note? Actually, they heckle. The questions--like where's the site plan or the cost benefit analysis--are legit; they were asked by the five elected officials and BrooklynSpeaks.

As for the count of attendees, there were only a few dozen proponents at the July 22 meeting. There were about 100 opponents (by my count) or 125 (by DDDB's count) at the July 29 meeting. Sure, there were more proponents, but the equation gets more complicated if you subtract those who are getting or expect to gain benefits from the project.

Not inclusive?

Witt then gets into the murky issue of "inclusion." I'd say it's undeniable that DDDB has not achieved a full rainbow coalition of race and class, but, then again, as AY proponents argued last week, caring about niceties like environmental impact is a "luxury" for those who already have jobs.

Witt writes:
Dillon, along with Rev. Clinton Miller from Brown Memorial Baptist Church, both said they have recently communicated with Goldstein and⁄or Carponter about the situation.

Dillon remains adamantly opposed to the project, while Miller said he still has concerns about the project, but has distanced himself from it somewhat after seeing DDDB “doing certain kinds of things” that did not appear to be inclusive to the neighborhood.


Miller told me that quote was inaccurate: "I’ve distanced myself from the whole discussion because I saw activity going on, namely at the [earlier] hearing, that was not inclusive of the neighborhood. I saw the politics of intimidation. I’ve seen DDDB heckle, but I haven’t seen them engage in intimidation."

He added that, because of his church responsibilities, including a major renovation, "sometimes it’s just hard to be out there."

Miller's testimony

"We will not allow people from other neighborhoods come and intimidate people from the community,” Miller said at the hearing. “We will not allow people come in and have people disrespect our officials, especially [state Senator] Velmanette Montgomery, [Assemblyman] Hakeem Jeffries, and [City Council Member] Tish James.”

Both Miller and Jeffries, who have a close relationship, made reference to a "circus-like atmosphere" in previous hearings.

Last week, however, the public officials running the meeting for the first time took pains to ensure that there were enough police officers, security guards, and well-enforced rules to maintain decorum.



(Video shot by Adrian Kinloch)

In Jeffries' testimony, he mentioned that public officials who testify go back to neighborhoods like Bay Ridge. As I wrote, that sounded like a dig at Golden, a Bay Ridge Republican and loyal AY supporter, who disrupted the oversight hearing and tangled particularly with Montgomery.

Indeed, Jeffries told me yesterday, "My commentary related in part to the Golden incident at the May hearing and the disrespect shown to both Senator Montgomery and Chairman [Bill] Perkins."

In other words, the unmentioned precipitating factor for Witt's story was the "circus-like atmosphere" on May 29.

Jeffries, who has long had a careful position on AY, has kept his distance from DDDB. But he was not pleased by the events of May 29, as the screenshot at right indicates, which shows him next to Golden, and surely he shared that with Miller.



(Video shot by Jonathan Barkey)

Common ground?

Goldstein reflected that, while there were vociferous project supporters, "in one-on-one discussions with many participants, many did not even know the issues, were ambivalent about the topics at hand and had been recruited. While we completely support union labor, many construction union members there were fulfilling commitments, and did not even know what the hearing was about.""

"We don't doubt at all that there are people of good will who support the project, and we believe there is A LOT of common ground to cover with those people," he added. "Many opponents and supporters of the project had constructive discussions at the hearing, with a lot of agreement on the issues."

Maybe. But those discussions were pretty quiet.

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.