Lingering questions: Did Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park get a new development manager after Forest City sold? If not, was a restriction violated--or waived?

I recently re-read this Empire State Development memo from December 2013 (obtained by BrooklynSpeaks) regarding the initial transaction in which Greenland USA bought 70% of Forest City Ratner's/Forest City Enterprises' interest going forward in Atlantic Yards, which Greenland later renamed Pacific Park.

From p. 13:

Restrictions are imposed on removal of FCRC [Forest City Ratner Companies] as a managing member of the joint venture exercising day-to-day control over the development work prior to the completion of the rail yard and platform. If FCRC's interests in the joint venture were to be bought out in such circumstances, Greenland must retain as its development manager either FCRC itself or another real estate company with at least 10 years of relevant development experience (and not less than five years of such experience in New York City) and meeting certain other specified criteria.

Well, nearly all of Forest City's interests were bought out in an agreement reached in January 2018, leaving Forest City with 5% and, as far as I can tell, no longer serving as a managing member. After all, executives with Forest City or Brookfield--which by December 2018 absorbed the parent company--have not been present at public meetings or cited as making decisions.

My questions

On 7/23/21, more than two weeks ago, I queried both Greenland and Empire State Development, the state authority which both oversees and shepherds the project:

• does Forest City (now part of Brookfield) remain in day-to-day control?
• has another company been retained by Greenland as development manager? if so, which one, and since when?
• is that requirement no longer valid? if so, how and when was it changed?

No response.

It may be that companies like Tishman Speyer serve as construction managers, but that's not the same as a development manager.

Reasons for concern

The implication in the 2013 restriction is that Greenland, with no track record in New York City development, did not have the local expertise to make Empire State Development feel confident about their performance. 

It's unclear whether there is any penalty for violating the restriction, or whether it was waived. 

What seems clear is that the developer and the state authority charged to oversee it are not welcoming the questions.