Second Development-Related Rally in May Expects Hundreds

better

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:16 AM

Um, Brownstoner, look at your banner ads. Those "luxury high-rises" going up on Myrtle are paying your writers' salaries...

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:18 AM

Is your question ("Do you think the end result will put Brooklyn better or worse off in 10 years") a rhetorical one? Obviously, the end result will be better. I have lived in the area for 10 years (University Towers now and ORO when it's finished) and while I love it here, the aesthetics of Flatbush Ave are a total eyesore. Let's put it this way, when I moved here, the footprint of Toren was a car wash, a "Kennedy Fried Chicken" and a check cashing spot. The footprint of Avalon Ft. Greene was a barber shop and a liquor store. Which one do YOU think is better?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:27 AM

What's the point of this protest? That the want Willoughby Street to stay as scummy as it currently is? That they want Myrtle Avenue to return to its "Murder Ave" glory? FUREE's a joke...in any event the core DoBro development and AY are apples and oranges. AY is over wrought with government subsidies and eminent domain issues, whereas in DoBro private developers have are purchasing private property and redeveloping and repositing...nothing wrong with that.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:31 AM

I would hardly call the 400 person anti-AY protest "massive"....

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:32 AM

The "no amenities" for the residents of Walt Whitman Houses, etc., is somewhat of a canard. There's a Bravo supermarket at the corner of Washington Park and Myrtle. Okay, so they have to walk five minutes longer to get there instead of crossing the street; maybe ten if they walk slowly. This isn't a significant difference in access from other residents in Fort Greene. There's also a small drugstore adjacent. It's not as big as the Duane Reade, but I think the argument is overblown. The other issues of displacement are more serious, I agree.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:33 AM

One other point: I'm not sure the 125th Street protest did fail. didn't the councilwoman up there hold out for a bunch of concessions, and Amanda Burden et al. had to capitulate? I'm hazy on the details, but I think that what happened with that actually does have ramifications for the rest of the city.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:35 AM

Yes please bring back the 99 cent stores. Gimme a break...

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 11:51 AM

The hypocrisy of the anti-AY people is astounding.

Atlantic Yards is, unquestionably, more beneficial to the residents of the area than any of these developments combined, because it provides more amenities, transportation improvements and affordable housing than any of these developments, and it will take hardly anything away - it is, in large part, literally a hole in the ground. But these developments which truly alter the communities around them are all a-ok!! I'm still waiting for norman oder's detailed critique of the use of eminent domain for the bam cultural district and willoughby square park.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 12:06 PM

Quite frankly, it's ALL good. The DoBro developments and Atlantic Yards. Succinctly, in 10 years with Atlantic Yards, Brooklyn Bridge Park, the BAM Cultural District and the streetscape improvements on Fulton Mall and Flatbush, Brooklyn will be one of the great cities in America. Anyone, who disagrees with that must be from another planet...

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 12:12 PM

you must me from another planet. Brooklyn IS now major part of "one of the great cities in America" and as that part gets better so does the whole city.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 12:55 PM

What exactly do the protesters want? The rezoning was done with full public hearings. Hasn't the ship already sailed?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 1:07 PM

12:55...I'm saying that Brooklyn, on a stand alone basis (not as PART of NYC, not as an "outer borough" of Manhattan) WILL be one of the great American cities once these improvements are made. As much as I love Brooklyn and would never want to live ANYWHERE else, we can't honestly make that claim now. While at it's core, BK represents the best of America, the exterior needs some work. It's like a fabulous house that needs the roof repaired and a paint job to realize it's full potential? Why is that a controversial assessment?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 1:29 PM

they'll get just a handful of boring losers with too much time on their hands.

Well, apparently a handful of boring losers with too much time on their hands are busying themselves here making obnoxious, ignorant and prejudiced comments right here on this thread. Personally I think that community organizing that gives a voice to people who are either silenced or ignored in these development processes is a much more worthwhile activity.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 1:31 PM

1:07 - The protesters have no idea what they want. They see that the ship is sailing and they don't have a ticket to get on board, so now they are crying about it. I've said this for years, FUREE are idiots. The time for protesting (if there was such a time) was during the rezoning process. I don't seem to recall the type of protests back in 2003 and 2004 (when the rezoning was approved to full public review) here in Brooklyn that recently took place in Harlem during their rezoning process. FUREE are mad that they can't afford they million dollar condos, won't be able to afford APPLE, BARNEY's, etc and the fact that there will be more non-black and latino faces walking along Myrtle, Flatbush and Willoughby in a few years (just for the record, I'm black and I've lived in University Towers for 10 years, so I've seen it all playing itself out).

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 1:36 PM

Whatever the real or perceived goals of FUREE, I think downtown Brooklyn will be worse ten years from now because it will have lost the opportunity to strengthen itself at the city's third central business district. I do think that a bunch of shiny new condos is an improvement over what is there, but they are not better than a vital civic and business hub with regional headquarters for small national companies and back office and creative industries tenants. I cannot believe how sloppy EDC/DCP's planning was on this, unless it was a bait and switch from the get go.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:03 PM

keep brooklyn BROOKLYN!!!!!!!

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:07 PM

2:03 -- we already have a substantial amount of office space in the area. and the hood is DEAD at night. we need some streetlife -- enough with the boring offices. just because they bring in high assessments and revenues doesn't make for a good neighborhood. wall st. is a great business district but until recently a shitty neighborhood.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:10 PM

2:07 -- what is brooklyn?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:14 PM

DoBro!!?? that is ridiculous. If you dont like the way downtown looks, dont go there. I bet 99% of you dont live there anyways. You want nice views, fancy shops, go to the city, or smith street or 5th ave (c'mon you live there anyways!!) we need to keep the variety and the options alive!

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:17 PM

2:10, there are plenty of sites for residential buildings on the periphery (Livingston, Schermerhorn, Myrtle, etc.) that can help downtown become a 24/7/365 community. But when you build residential buildings immediately adjacent to Metrotech (Lawrence, Willoughby), you've lost those sites forever. Just like you need a critical mass to have a vibrant neighborhood, you need a critical mass of commercial tenants to have a vital CBD. The city has already killed most of its industrial areas; is it now going to write off the outer-borough business districts? -- 2:03

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:19 PM

When the rezoning process occurred there was very little community input.

It seems from the xenophobic comments above that there's an inability to be open minded and ask REAL questions about why people are protesting this in the first place.

I don't think anyone is against development as long as the process is democratic, inclusive and takes existing community needs into account.

Where will the thousands of low income families go if they are pushed out the neighborhood?

Also, it was the poor, Black people some of you referred to that made the neighborhood the 3rd largest shopping district in New York City. And, this is long after white flight of the area after WWII and building of Fort Greene and Downtown Brooklyn from the ground up.

Whether its a 99 cents store or a Zales on the corner of Hoyt, its about protecting the diversity that makes Brooklyn and NYC unique. And, that diversity should not be boiled down to "allowing" poor people of color entrance in the neighborhood as street sweepers and retail cashiers.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:22 PM

2:14 if you have to ask that then you just dont have any love for bklyn and are probably one of the main reasons that it is losing its edge.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:25 PM

11:24 - "They never acknowledge that shopping district exists because those same shopkeepers are afraid to open stores in the neighborhoods from where their shoppers come..."

Really? I would love to read the empirical evidence you based this comment on. That shopping area exists as it is, in fact, because it is profitable and ideally located in the middle of the second biggest subway hub in NYC. Of course it used to be an almost exclusively white space (not that white people ever notice when something is predominantly white) until all of your parents and grandparents fled to the suburbs. Those without that luxury or option filled the vacuum of white flight. The businesses in Fulton Mall are a reflection of that and the concomitant disinvestment by the city, as well as the lack of capital resources available to the tenants for major structural improvements.

But these days white flight is going the other way; the upper-middle class is pouring back into cities and suburbanizing them as quickly as possible, remaking them in their own image. And just like their parents couldn't possibly understand why blacks would be angry about economic disenfranchisement, social exclusion, and segregation (yes! I am talking about 20th century BROOKLYN here), these wonderful new "Brooklynites" can't possibly imagine why people would be angry enough to fight back, when what little space and community they have garnered for themselves is ripped away to make room for the aesthetic taste and consumer culture of the "upper class."

1:36 - congratulations for being black "for the record." Even Bill Cosby and Condi Rice have to pull that one out from time to time to keep their cred.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:31 PM

In this fast-paced world of high-speed internet, cable TV, blackberries, video games, cell phones, and iPods, protest as a form of social action is obselete. The attention span of the public is simply too short to take notice, especially when attendance is as low as it was at the recent AY rally. Protests, marches, etc. may earn a few seconds on the local news (though even that is rare), and are then quickly forgotten. This protest will surely suffer the same fate.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:39 PM

I think community organizing is important. Too often developers get away with anything they want as community boards and city planning let developers do whatever they want.

Only when community members get involved do people get what they want. So what is wrong with letting people ask for what they want.

I hope that community members fight hard for what they want. Nobody will fight for them.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:57 PM

I think community organizing is important. Too often developers get away with anything they want as community boards and city planning let developers do whatever they want.

Only when community members get involved do people get what they want. So what is wrong with letting people ask for what they want.

I hope that community members fight hard for what they want. Nobody will fight for them.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 2:57 PM

I'm one of those white suburbanites who grew up and moved to Brooklyn, and a big reason why is because I couldn't stand the lack or racial and economic diversity where I grew up. Downtown Brooklyn has a long history of racial cooperation, since back when those houses on Duffield Street were Underground Railroad stops and free slaves settled the neighborhoods nearby. The proposed redevelopment threatens to upset the historic balance we have and impose an unwanted homogeneity on our racially mixed neighborhood. Whether or not I shop downtown or on Smith Street is irrelevant. Smith Street already exists for me to shop on, and downtown Brooklyn exists for my neighbors. The expected cultural encroachment is greedy and unnecessary.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:10 PM

So Condi and Cosby don't have any cred because they made something of themselves huh? I guess what you're saying is that "real" blacks are poor and incapable of making something of themselves?

What a sad thing to think.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:25 PM

"keep brooklyn Brooklyn!!!!!"

2:14, it means "keep the Downtown Brooklyn shopping district attractive only to the black and poor".

That's basically FUREE's goal, isn't it?

I fail to see why the area should serve only the nearby residents of the Farragut houses. There are decent and hardworking taxpayers that live just as close (in Brooklyn Heights, in Boerum Hill) that don't have a lot of shopping options close by. Why should they be forced to trek outside their neighborhood and borough to shop?

2:31--what "space and community" have "they garnered" in Downtown Brooklyn? Shopping in an area doesn't give you any rights to it, nor does it form a community.

I've heard some people try to compare Downtown Brooklyn to Chinatown or Little Italy (in the sense that they cater to a specific group). However, unlike in Chinatown and Little Italy, blacks don't own the buildings in downtown. They don't own the businesses. They don't even live there!

If the members of FUREE would spend as much time getting jobs as they do complaining, maybe they wouldn't be on public assistance (as most of them are). Maybe then they wouldn't feel the need to protest the loss of a few sneaker stores and gold chain shops.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:33 PM

2:07 & 2:25, seriously, what do you want to preserve about brooklyn?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:34 PM

3:25 - plenty of black people are successful without being a gatekeeper (as is Cosby and 1:36) or a neoconservative lacky (as is Condi)mentioned above.

It's a sad thing to think, that the only way you can imagine a successful black person is as a conservative or assimilationst.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:39 PM

3:34,

This article might answer your question:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/05/nyregion/thecity/05stre.html?_r=1&fta=y&oref=slogin

Apparently, they want Brooklyn to remain a shopping zone for low income blacks only, to the exclusion of other Brooklynites. Here's a quote from one of the members of FUREE in the article:

“This mall caters to African-Americans, Latinos, Caribbeans,” said Ms. Cruickshank. “When they close down all these local shops that cater to our hair, the clothes we buy, the food we eat, where are we going to shop?” Ms. Cruickshank asked. “Round up 10 people here, and I guarantee you they won’t say they want a Banana Republic. We don’t want another Manhattan. Let Brooklyn be Brooklyn.”

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:44 PM

jay-z for president.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:45 PM

Please define what an assimilationist is specifically as it relates to blacks born in the United States.

I need a laugh.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:47 PM

3:10 -- Glad you're here to close the door on all the other white suburbanites who want to live in Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:49 PM

3:33 - "Shopping in an area doesn't give you any rights to it, nor does it form a community"

Having the most money does NOT give a person more rights to space/shopping/living either. Or at least in a real democracy it wouldn't.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:49 PM

3:49 -- "Having the most money does NOT give a person more rights to space/shopping/living either. Or at least in a real democracy it wouldn't."

no, having money doesn't give you rights, but owning the space does.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:51 PM

To 3:10 -- The "historic balance" is separate neighborhoods for whites and blacks, and the only reason why the neighborhood you have now is at all "racially mixed" is because it's in the midst of the gentrification process... or we can hope that's not true. We can HOPE that after all these years, we've gotten better at tolerating diverse neighborhoods. It's not exactly the race that's the issue, but the economics. People who get upset over white people moving into neighborhoods they can afford to live in, like Crown Heights, rather than doing the impossible, which would be staying in neighborhoods they can't afford like Park Slope, seem to be supporters of the separate but equal clause to me. And they are unfair and unrealistic, especially when the focus should be on what's happening economically, not racially. That only perpetuates the racial divide.

Your 'Downtown Brooklyn is for them, Smith Street is for me' is also an extension of the separate but equal clause. And it's ignorant. Many minorities can afford to shop at nice stores and do. A lot of the stuff on Fulton Street cost just as much as the stuff in SoHo, it's designer sportswear just by different brands. And if you go shopping in SoHo, you'll see tons of non-white people shopping in those stores, sometimes more than white people. Minorities have money too and we can only hope that as time goes on more minorities will have the money to buy one of the new condos in Downtown Brooklyn. The idea that black people don't buy Apple and Guess and gourmet food is simply dated and from another era I'd rather not return to. And it's you so-called liberals who think you're looking out for the 'poor blacks' that are holding back progress even more by clinging to this sympathetic but offensive stereotype. While all races are obviously not economically equal now, your view hurts, not helps. And by the way, many times when stores get pushed out because of economic forces, viable retail districts crop up in other places. Maybe it will help spur more economic activity in other neighborhoods.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:56 PM

3:44 - Considering that housing and commercial space are bought and sold in the market, and are thus part of the the same race towards profit motive as anything else, how would it ever be possible to bring in a few "high-end" stores/restaurants/etc. without raising the property values so that the "low-end" business would be displaced?

When in NYC, or anywhere else, has gentrification not displaced all or most of the low-income people living there? Nobody who shops in Fulton Mall would be against improvements, but when improvements inevitably lead to total displacement, what is the answer?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 3:58 PM

“This mall caters to African-Americans, Latinos, Caribbeans,” said Ms. Cruickshank. “When they close down all these local shops that cater to our hair, the clothes we buy, the food we eat, where are we going to shop?” Ms. Cruickshank asked. “Round up 10 people here, and I guarantee you they won’t say they want a Banana Republic. We don’t want another Manhattan. Let Brooklyn be Brooklyn.”

Sorry there arent enough nice shopping places in your neighborhood, so build some. Dont push people out that have been there and define and shape a certain area. So what does define a neighborhood if people that shop and support it does?? Tell me that! People with money think they are so much better than others. get a life, or a hobby! Oh so shallow..

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:01 PM

3:58,

Considering that no one lives in the Fulton Mall, I'd say that your fears are misplaced. Low-income people might bemoan the idea that their shopping haunt might become a little more upscale (ie, white), but no one is losing their homes.

Anyway, many of the shoppers come from the many public housing projects that line downtown. I doubt they're getting kicked out for condo conversions.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:09 PM

4:01,

"Sorry there arent enough nice shopping places in your neighborhood, so build some."

I believe we're building some as I type.

With any luck, Downtown Brooklyn will change to provide goods and services for ALL of the people that live in the area--not just low-income folks from the projects.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:14 PM

3:47 "define what an assimilationist is specifically as it relates to blacks born in the United States."

A person that buys into the (white) mainstream idea that race and class are *not* inextricably connected in America, and so imagines that the only racism that exists is the "prejudice" of a few bad individuals (and therefore believes that racism cannot be embedded in the structures of our society).

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:22 PM

Boricua: One part of my response is that you're now asking to reverse economic forces. When an area becomes in demand and starts to redevelop rents and housing prices will inevitably begin to skyrocket. Are you requesting that the city find a way to decrease demand for Downtown Brooklyn? The second answer is, the goal should not be to surpress economic development, the goal should be to increase the standing of minorities so more of them can afford to live in these nice neighborhoods. Do you really think most minorities wouldn't want to live in one of these expensive condos and eat at these nice restuarants and shop at these nice clothing stores? People should focus their energies on figuring out ways to achieve economic parity, not on keeping out private investment and white people. It's probably easier to achieve economic parity between the races than to supress market forces and keep white people from moving to certain neighborhoods. Activists' time and energy are limited. Which would you rather focus your time and energy on, the latter or the former? Seems to me that more progress has already been made on the latter, and it also seems to me that minorities, if given the choice, would rather be part of economic advancement rather than just keeping it out of their neighborhoods. But instead, people for some reason find it easier to focus on boogyman rhetoric, which is totally counter productive.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:28 PM

This shouldnt be about race and I dont know why it has come down to that. It is about having a mix of places for people to shop. Places that cater to all types of people. The great thing about downtown is that you can get things that you cant find anywhere else in most of brooklyn and the city. People that dont shop there because its not their type dont realize that though.

and 4:09, look at Ingersoll Houses, people are going to be kicked out for Oro, Avalon, Toren and everything else thats going up over there. Where do they go?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:34 PM

Boricua Jack,

"Wow, that's some classic classism right there. Can't you come up with something more original than blaming low-income folks for their plight or making it seem like they're less deserving than people with more money?"

Most people decide their own fate.

I absolutely blame many low-income folks for their plight. Take Nitza Nieves, for example. Chair of the board of FUREE. On welfare, lives in public housing--did I mention she HAS 6 KIDS? Maybe she wouldn't have to rely on handouts if she had a little self control.

Or maybe Marvell Cruickshank, another FUREE member. Lives in public housing, had her first child at 17. Instead of having 3 kids, maybe she could've gone to college and gotten a decent paying job instead of collecting welfare.

"I bet that many of the people who you're slandering right there are just as "hardworking" as those folks you mention from Brooklyn Heights or Boerum Hill, if not more so."

Who knows? I'm sure some are, but I bet most of the people aren't really that hardworking. It's all speculation. I will say, however, that I see an awful lot of healthy young men and women in the projects that don't seem to do anything except loiter. Oh, and hang out at the Fulton Mall.

"Also willing to bet that most of them are more decent than you."

If by decent you mean "on welfare, sucking up my tax dollars", then yes, you're absolutely right.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:35 PM

4:09,

Bullshit. No one in the projects is getting kicked out of the Ingersoll Houses to make way for condos.

Oro, Avalon, and Toren replaced a few businesses (a gas station, for example), but no residential buildings were destroyed to make way for those projects. In fact, one of the biggest complaints people have about the condos you mentioned is that they are right next to THE INGERSOLL HOUSES.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:39 PM

I love when people talk about "market forces" as if there is no ideological weight behind it. As if "market forces" just neutrally push and pull, without the intervention of the government, without the influence of history.
These "market forces" do not drive toward economic parity because that would mean less profit. Would you still hire your cleaning lady if she demanded to be paid enough to afford a college education so she wouldn't have to be a cleaning lady?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:46 PM

4:39 i know what used to be where the new condos are going. You say thats the biggest complaint of people. boohoo. If you dont like whats there, then you dont like the neighborhood, if you dont like the neighborhood, dont live there. its that easy.

But just so you know, they will be gone. it will happen and I will come back and say i told you so. just cause im nice like that!! :)

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:48 PM

4:22 I understand now. So if you you're black and you don't feel that the man is keeping down but that you can do whatever you put your mind to you are an assimilationist.

I can't believe it. I was thinking of voting for an assimilationist for president. Imagine that.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 4:54 PM

4:48,

I'm not sure what your point it, but I'm not planning to live in that neighborhood. And as much as I'd like to see the Ingersoll Houses go away, there's no chance of that happening. I was just point out that the residents of Ingersoll were in no way displaced to make room for the new condo developments.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:01 PM

4:54...hmmm apparently you don't know your candidate very well (from his website):

"Disparities Continue to Plague Criminal Justice System: African Americans and Hispanics are more than twice as likely as whites to be searched, arrested, or subdued with force when stopped by police. Disparities in drug sentencing laws, like the differential treatment of crack as opposed to powder cocaine, are unfair."

Seems to me that your guy actually does admit that there is institutional racism in America (check his website...there are a ton of examples). Must be a conundrum for you to imagine a black man that is both successful AND sees racism as a social, not just individual, problem.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:07 PM

It's crazy how racist a lot of folks on this blog are.

Yuck!

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:08 PM

Boricua Jack,

Just pointing out a few of the community "leaders" who insist on protesting the very developments that will help the tax base (and of course, pay for the welfare that Nitza and her 6 kids take everyday).

Great role models, aren't they?

They're talking about saving a few cheap stores that sell hair relaxers and shea butter. I say the black and hispanic communities have much bigger problems that FUREE could be holding marches about.

Decency? I'll tell you what's indecent, Jack. Living off welfare your entire life, having multiple children with different fathers, working to preserve a "culture" that coined the term "baby daddy"--and beliving anything I wrote is BS.

Unfortunately, nothing I wrote is BS. Tell me ONE THING I wrote that is untrue.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:17 PM

The Mighty Q (I assume that's your real name?),

I didn't publicize anything. Everything I wrote is proudly noted on the FUREE website.

Misinformed? About what, pray tell? About the fact that they're on welfare? Or the number of children they have?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:23 PM

5:07 #1 The conundrum is why despite facing the obstacles of racism he was able to succeed when so many others simply use it as an excuse for their lot in life.

5:07 #2 KKK blogger? Where does the post that so angers you mention race?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:26 PM

5:26 - What about highly educated parents? A private school education? Middle class upbringing?

I guess all those things equate to class...once again bringing up the race-class connection in America. If there is institutional racism in America, which Obama admits in spite of his personal successes, then those people who use "it as an excuse for their lot in life" might actually be describing REAL issues.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:41 PM

Mighty O -- while I agree with your sentiment, your style of delivery is kind of comical. Also, ad hominem racist labels when discussing the tax base are generally not helpful.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 5:53 PM

It's ironic that this whole discussion is on a site funded by new condo development. Just check out the Toren ad above... without it, we all might be sitting home alone not talking about this.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 6:03 PM

As much as I would love to see Fulton Mall change, I seriously doubt that it ever will. The stores there seem to be doing quite well and anytime I pass through (several days per week), the area is teeming with commercial activity (and for those of you who are thinking of drug sales, kindly spare us that stale joke!).

All in all, I think that organizations such as FUREE are outdated. Community-based organizations had their heydey in the late 60s and are unlikely to have any appreciable impact on macrosystemic issues like race, class, and equality in contemporary times.

I agree with the poster who advocates for sacrifice and personal responsibility. Those concepts are why people from impoverished, war-torn nations can move to the US with no skills or knowledge of English, yet still succeed in life. Though many still face obstacles in today's world, those who play by the rules do far better in life than those who do not. (i.e. getting an education, forming long-term partnerships with a significant other, postponing parenthood until a degree of financial stability has been achieved, saving money, buying property, etc. vs. dropping out of school/neglecting to get GED, not going to college or trade school, having children at young ages, single parenthood, etc.)

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 6:35 PM

6:35 Just a point of clarification on "having children at young ages." Although it's true that upper and middle income teenagers have lower pregnancy rates, they also have much higher abortion rates. Are you saying that these mothers discussed above should have chosen an abortion? Also, single parents and young mothers can be successful, too. "Forming long-term partnerships..." tell that to the guys on Wall Street who consider hiring escorts a hobby, or to the fifty percent of the couples who get divorced, rich and poor.

Some of this stuff is very offensive to me when we really should be discussing policies that will make our city better at economic growth and integration in the future. I see a lot of people criticizing people, making generalizations, blaming each other. But I don't think I've read any solutions, unless I missed them in all this MUTUALLY RACIST scapegoating garbage.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 6:58 PM

I am a journalist looking for people to interview about Fulton Mall and am especially looking for people who are pro-development. I would love to speak personally with some of the commenters on this stream, again, especially people who favor the new vision for downtown Brooklyn. If you are brave enough shed your anonymity and come out and speak where it counts -- on the public record -- then please contact me ASAP at msaldean@gmail.com or 917-586-6543. My name is Allison Dean. Thanks.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 7:09 PM

Is this your unbiased project:

Uprooted
By Kelly Anderson and Allison Lirish Dean
Uprooted dramatically illustrates the destruction of a vibrant African-American and Caribbean
shopping district in the heart of Brooklyn. A thriving crossroads of black history and culture, the
Fulton Mall is one of New York City's most economically successful and diverse commercial
centers. But a 2004 rezoning means it could be virtually unrecognizable within a decade. By
exploring the dynamics of a privatized urban renewal process in Downtown Brooklyn, Uprooted
sheds light on critical questions currently facing urban communities and policy advocates, and
tells a story of a city disconnected from its ordinary citizens, its history, and its soul. Produced in
association with Families United for Racial and Economic Equality.
Distribution Information: Allison Lirish Dean, msaldean@gmail.com

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 7:15 PM

PS I just made the previous post and neglected to say that I would be especially interested in interviewing Polemicist -- your perspective would be extremely valuable to my work. If you are willing please contact me at msaldean@gmail.com or 917-586-6543. Thanks, Allison Dean

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 7:17 PM

so basically you are looking for souless people?

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 7:20 PM

7:15 PM - OMG AMAZING DETECTIVE SKILLZ. i.e. way to Google someone who posted her full name, which seems to indicate that she isn't trying to hide anything. And who said anything about "unbiased?" Plenty of excellent documentary work is "biased."

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 7:59 PM

6:58 - "MUTUALLY RACIST scapegoating garbage"

You mean reverse racism?

No such thing. Sorry.

Posted by: guest at May 8, 2008 8:04 PM

i think it's really amazing that people think an unregulated free market is the answer to everything. many places in this country (and certainly outside) have much more democratic processes for approving zoning changes than NYC. the public hearing process is a joke -- people take their time to go to a hearing and make heartfelt statements and the project goes forward anyway. the only reason people didn't protest the downtown brooklyn plan when it happened was that nobody knew it was happening. what would it be like to live in a place where people were actually notified adequately about proposed changes, and then were able to have some real impact in a public process? there are places in this country where you need to engage the community by law, or the development doesn't happen.

the point isn't to keep fulton mall black and poor, it's about not allowing money to control the agenda to the exclusion of everything else. there are other ways to measure what a good community is besides who has most money.

we need more informed analysis and less rhetoric, especially racist and stupid comments, on this blog. and as for shopping districts not being part of community, why do you have to live somewhere to have a stake in it? what about the more than 20 small business-owners who just got evicted with 30-days notice because of some small print in their leases? don't they have a stake in what happens? and does anybody really think a bunch of big retail chains you would find on 34th street are better than the mix that's at fulton mall now?

Posted by: guest at May 9, 2008 5:38 AM

"Although it's true that upper and middle income teenagers have lower pregnancy rates, they also have much higher abortion rates. Are you saying that these mothers discussed above should have chosen an abortion?"

No, I never said that (you can even re-check my post and, sure enough, that statement will not appear). Still, it's true that men and women who postpone parenthood until they are financially stable (yes, even if said postponement involves abortion) do better in life.

"Also, single parents and young mothers can be successful, too."

I agree, and I never said that they couldn't. But it's common sense that people who earn a college or advanced degree, form long-term partnerships, postpone parenthood, save money, buy property, and sacrifice today for tomorrow by and large do much better in life than those who drop out of school, have children in their teens, go on public assistance, and become single parents. Most research indicates that the latter suffer immeasurably more than the former.

"Forming long-term partnerships..." tell that to the guys on Wall Street who consider hiring escorts a hobby, or to the fifty percent of the couples who get divorced, rich and poor.

Wow, for someone who is so offended by stereotyping, you sure are eager to lump Wall Street employees into broad-based categories. If anything, you prove the point that I made above. Wall Street guys generally have advanced degrees and lucrative jobs obtained through diligence and long hours at work. They also save money, buy property and stocks, and plan ahead. Yes, the divorce rate is high in the US, but if a divorcee has an education, significant work experience, and an ability to sacrifice and see the bigger picture, then he/she will still fare better than those who are uneducated, on public assistance, and unemployed/or not seeking work.

"Some of this stuff is very offensive to me..."

Welcome to the internet, where anonymity breeds honesty. I, too, read things on this board that offend me, but that goes with the territory. If you can't take it, then cease logging on to brownstoner. Also, the above is NOT racist. Every point made pertains to BEHAVIOR, not race. White people constitute the majority of welfare recipients and display every behavior that I've outlined here.

Posted by: guest at May 9, 2008 9:02 AM

There seems to be a sentiment running through some of these posts complaining about the current state of downtown Brooklyn, Fulton Mall, etc. It's appalling to me how a dialogue about Brooklyn and NYC's future development and growth turns into an opportunity to bash working-class housing project residents (by name, no less!) some of whom receive welfare as well as more generally the poor and working poor of this neighborhood, many of whom are Latino immigrants and African Americans. This kind of sentiment that the area's necessarily better off without certain populations (and the state should plan it that way) is expressed in assertions perhaps made by overly defensive residents (new to NY?) taking refuge from their neighbors, without realizing or thinking it's a problem that in downtown Brooklyn and Fort Greene, for instance, where homes can sell regularly for $1 million+, the poverty rate is 31% (something more like 46% in the projects).

Whatever your vision of Brooklyn, which may or may not include people of color and existing communities that the City (and pro-development interests) deem "blighted," shouldn't it be troubling that the City, in fact, plans to use eminent domain seizures in these and other development projects in Brooklyn, that businesses and residents are being harassed, priced out, or displaced?

And, in terms of what Brooklyn "is," it's historically been defined against and in opposition to what's been perceived as Manhattan real estate interests. Manhattan is generally where the money is, where luxury condos have been, where skyscrapers are built. Brooklyn has generally not been all those things. If the current craze in condo building and development-at-all-stakes is allowed to continue, then there will be textures, cultures, and long-term residents displaced. It will be a very different New York City from the one that a lot of us grew up with, a place that yes (famously) had crime and safety, depopulation, capital flight, and white flight issues, but also a lot of good stuff that didn't (and doesn't) make it into mainstream media.

Posted by: guest at May 9, 2008 11:42 AM

"...expressed in assertions perhaps made by overly defensive residents (new to NY?).."

How does being "overly defensive" (if, indeed, that is what these posts are) equate with being new to NYC? This sounds like the perennial counterinsult hurled at people from the "midwest". Many native New Yorkers of all colors and creeds take issue with issues outlined in this thread, which are hardly the domain of alleged newbies.

Trust me, the NYC of the future contains people of color. In my Prospect Heights building the # of African-Americans has increased with gentrification, only the recent arrivals are all college-educated professionals. The area is gradually diversifying, changing from predominantly African-American and Caribbean to a population containing both of those groups, plus whites and Asians.

Posted by: guest at May 9, 2008 12:11 PM

It's Allison Dean again here. I am a journalist and posted earlier about wanting to talk to people on this stream. I am looking for people with different points of view to talk to precisely because I am interested in getting a range of viewpoints. I have co-produced projects for non-profits to use in their advocacy work, it's true. The project I'm interested in interviewing people who are posting here for is separate from that work. So again, I would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with people posting here, especially if you have a positive view of what is going on around Fulton Mall and in downtown Brooklyn, because I have not been able to talk to many people who are coming from that perspective. People posting here are obviously extremely passionate about the issues, and I believe it's important for these different voices to be heard, in my project and in the media in general. So, again, if anyone on this stream would be willing to speak with me I'd be grateful and happy to answer any questions people may have about my work. Thanks, Allison Dean, msaldean@gmail.com 917-586-6543

Posted by: guest at May 9, 2008 4:21 PM

Ice Cube was right.

"Us...will always sing the blues
'Cause all we care about is hairstyles and tennis shoes."

Posted by: guest at May 9, 2008 6:31 PM