Skip to main content

Looking back at the fundamental flaws in the Atlantic Yards Community Benefits Agreement

From 2006 brochure
More than a few citizens and journalists are asking about the 2005 Atlantic Yards Community Benefits Agreement (CBA), so let's recall some history about the document long touted as a model but now seen as a "borderline calamity."

First note my update, which describes how four of the extant seven groups (one the eight already closed, as noted below) are essentially inactive, with some initiatives accomplished, others pursued but with question marks, and others vague or ignored.

But it was flawed from the start.

Facade of process

Bettina Damiani, then at Good Jobs New York, submitted this testimony at a May 2005 City Council hearing:
[W]e feel it is important to draw the Council’s attention to several major differences between CBAs as they have been used in other parts of the country and the series of negotiations that FCRC is calling a CBA. Perhaps the most striking is that elsewhere CBAs are negotiated by one broad coalition of groups that would otherwise oppose a project, a coalition that includes labor and community organizations representing a variety of interests.... In the BAY [Brooklyn Atlantic Yards] case, several groups, all of which have publicly supported the project already, have each engaged in what seem to be separate negotiations on particular issues... However, to use the “CBA” model set forth by the landmark STAPLES Center agreement in Los Angeles for a series of non-binding side agreements between already supportive community groups and a developer can only set a low bar for future attempts to negotiate for broad-based benefits from major development projects. Without broad, crosscutting organizing, such “CBAs” can become a mechanism for dividing the community rather than uniting it, and devolve into a mere publicity tool for developers of controversial projects.
Dividing the community

Indeed, the CBA was indeed a publicity tool and did become a mechanism for dividing the community. Prospect Heights activist Gib Veconi wrote in November 2012 on Patch, upon the closure of job-training group BUILD (Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development):
Forest City was going to use a CBA as a wedge to separate civic leaders residing mostly in outlying neighborhoods from the more affluent residents of the community immediately surrounding Atlantic Yards... Any firm that would be so brazen in manufacturing support as to stage a “community” strategy session in its conference room would certainly have no qualms about disposing of such support as soon as its usefulness had ended.
...Although the CBA may have been in theory “legally binding,” enforceability would only have been possible if BUILD was not dependent upon Forest City for funding. Forest City never even bothered to hire the independent compliance monitor the CBA required. BUILD failed to convert promises of a pre-apprenticeship training program into union jobs for local residents.
Here's my coverage of the BUILD lawsuit and its resolution.

Questions of legitimacy 

Vicki Been, then an NYU Law School professor and now the Commissioner of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, wrote in a 2010 paper for the New York City Bar Association about the questionable legitimacy of the CBA:
Only eight community organizations signed the Atlantic Yards CBA... Many interested observers have expressed concern that the signatory groups are not representative of the impacted constituencies. Lance Freeman, an Associate Professor of Urban Planning at Columbia University, for example, criticized the Atlantic Yards CBA on the grounds that “there is no mechanism to insure that the ‘community’ in a CBA is representative of the community.”
...The problem of representativeness is compounded by the potential for conflicts of interest. The cooperation of at least one community group that signed the Atlantic Yards CBA, BUILD, followed closely behind Forest City Ratner’s financial contribution to the organization. 
As I wrote in June 2014, a document in the the BUILD lawsuit discussed how Forest City hired a consultant specializing in nonprofit management, Ritchie Tye Consulting, to evaluate the eight groups that signed the CBA.

The consultant essentially validated the widespread critique of the CBA: that most groups had no track record in the community (I'd note that individuals associated with groups did have a record) and were set up to support the project.

The report even said that an effort to find a grant-writer to raise money for the signatories--otherwise funded by Forest City Ratner--was unsuccessful partly because people thought the groups were "fronts" for Forest City.

Questions of oversight

As I've written before, Forest City promised an Independent Compliance Monitor, but never hired one.

"We doing something here that is historic," the developer's then-point man, Jim Stuckey, said at a November 2004 meeting, as shown in the video below. "Never been done in New York City before. And what we’re doing is that we’ve agreed to enter into a legally-binding Community Benefits Agreement that will be monitored by an independent monitoring group not associated with anybody who actually negotiates that agreement."


Video by producers of Battle for Brooklyn

"And we’re doing that because not only do we believe that we should do the things that we say we will do, just as we have in the past"--note Stuckey's somewhat defensive tone--"but we also believe that we should set the bar."

Conflicts of interest

Who could enforce it? Only signatories--unlike in some other cities, where government bodies were also signatories.

And those signatories--even the few with significant records of work in Brooklyn outside Atlantic Yards--are deeply entangled with the developer, which likely tamps down public criticism.

Consider that Bertha Lewis of New York ACORN raised significant money from Forest City Ratner to rescue (briefly) national ACORN, and earlier signed a document requiring her to publicly support the project. While she has called the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park affordable housing a "model," she has not publicly commented on how the affordability on the next two towers skews away from the agreement New York ACORN signed with Forest City but instead assists, most significantly, households earning six figures.

As to perhaps the most active current CBA signatory, the Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance (DBNA)--involved in regular ticket giveaways and a new community foundation--its founder, the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, expressed no concern about whether Forest City didn't follow its overall package of promises. Then again, the DBNA is not only funded by Forest City, it employs two members of the Daughtry family, and assigned project work to another.

As I wrote nearly ten years ago (!), in model CBAs, signatories agree to support the project but don't themselves benefit. “As a matter of principle, groups in our network don’t take money from developers. We want to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest,” said John Goldstein, National Program Director of The Partnership for Working Families. “We have advocated in CBAs that developers give to the communities they’re developing in."

Lack of disclosure

At a public meeting in July 2009, Forest City executive MaryAnne Gilmartin was asked how much money it had given to its CBA partners.

“I don’t have those numbers,” she responded.

She was asked for an estimate.

“Forest City has funding obligations and commitments to each of the organizations, and they’re reviewed on an annual basis,” Gilmartin said. “We’re happy to provide an accounting, generally, of that, but I don’t have that information with me."

They never provided that accounting (which surely would show that the commitments for several of the groups were short-term).

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.