« Open Thread BREAKING: Fire on Smith and Warren »

November 24, 2009

BREAKING: Goldstein et al Lose Eminent Domain Lawsuit

The New York State Court of Appeals has just ruled in favor of the ESDC in the closely-watched eminent domain lawsuit brought by property owners in the footprint of its proposed Atlantic Yards project. According to Atlantic Yards Report, "In a decision (PDF) that gives the crucial--but perhaps not final--boost to the Atlantic Yards project, the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals, approved the use of eminent domain by a 6-1 margin, saying that it's not the role of the courts to intervene in agency decisions, given the wide latitude in state law." The ruling means that Ratner may proceed with the sale of tax-exempt bonds to finance the sports arena that is scheduled to be the first stage of the gigantic development. The construction of both affordable and market-rate housing is supposed to begin with months of the arena, but as The New York Times points out this morning, "with so many new apartments sitting vacant, analysts say it could be many years before demand will justify building so many units in one neighborhood."
Atlantic Yards Project in Brooklyn Clears Legal Hurdle [NY Times]
Court of Appeals upholds AY eminent domain 6-1 [AY Report]
Photo by Tracy Collins

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/12411

Comments

Just desserts to DG and DDDB. What a bunch of whiners.

Posted by: bupe at November 24, 2009 9:35 AM

Hooray!!!!

Posted by: dirty_hipster at November 24, 2009 9:37 AM

was there ever any doubt that this would occur?

has anybody ever fought city hall and won?

Posted by: friend_or_foe at November 24, 2009 9:38 AM

Hooray. Can we all just move on now????

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 24, 2009 9:39 AM

yea really, thses Atlantic Yards articles are soporific.

Posted by: dittoburg at November 24, 2009 9:41 AM

Poorly dressed developer with ugly arena - 1
NIMBY people disguised as eminent domain crusaders - 0

Posted by: Brokedeveloper at November 24, 2009 9:41 AM

How many lawsuits were there in total???

I think it's more like:

Poorly dressed developer with ugly arena - 5
NIMBY people disguised as eminent domain crusaders - 0

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 24, 2009 9:44 AM

eminent domain would be a great name for a band.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at November 24, 2009 9:50 AM

At least they tried. A lot of people stood on the sidelines while Ratner bilked us.

Of all the things America needs right now, spending public money on a stadium for a d-bag developer and a Russian billionaire doesn't seem that smart to me.

Posted by: Johnny at November 24, 2009 9:53 AM

of course there are more lawsuits.
this is a city filled with lawyers.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 24, 2009 9:56 AM

There's at least one more suit that could kill it.

Posted by: Arkady at November 24, 2009 9:58 AM

"of course there are more lawsuits.
this is a city filled with lawyers."

You also need outraged plaintiffs. But there's always plenty of those too.

Posted by: dittoburg at November 24, 2009 10:00 AM

So it's now ok to wear your Brooklyn nets cafepress tshirts

Posted by: FYI at November 24, 2009 10:01 AM

BREAKING NEWS: U.S. Consumer Confidence rises to 49.5 from a revised 48.7. Expectations were for 47.3.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 24, 2009 10:02 AM

And the team we're getting is currently 0-13.

Posted by: DeLepp at November 24, 2009 10:07 AM

Yeah, what bupe said

Posted by: be_rude at November 24, 2009 10:09 AM

By the time they get to Brooklyn, it won't be the same 0-13 guys.

I don't necessarily believe LeBron will become a Net, but that's the general flavor of what will happen: bigger names joining the team now that it is actually in NYC and atop mass transit links.

Posted by: be_rude at November 24, 2009 10:11 AM

Actually NIMBY has lost i believe 22 lawsuits
this was totally predictable
ground already broken, money lined up
watch it happen
Heavy Metal Marathons at Flatbush Avenue!!!!

Posted by: BK realestate veteran at November 24, 2009 10:13 AM

so what has consumer confidence have to do with this?

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 24, 2009 10:14 AM

If Nets move to Brooklyn every free agent will want to play here for market exposure, endorsement money and to hop on the Jay-Z bandwagon.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at November 24, 2009 10:15 AM

Delusional to think that the remaining lawsuits will win. Delay perhaps, but with the consistent failed attempts the stadium is inevitable.

Posted by: FYI at November 24, 2009 10:20 AM

We're not "getting" a team. We're just renting a team for a few years until they find a city dumb enough to give the franchise more money than we did. The Jay Z bandwagon is really just a few million promo dollars - most likely taken from the $50 mill in affordable housing money we gave Ratner. He doesn't have any other money.

Posted by: Johnny at November 24, 2009 10:20 AM

Dont count your arena before it hatches.....the NIMBYs have endless grounds for frivolous lawsuits and Ratner has to get ground broken soon to maintain many of the tax benefits in the original deal. It will be close.....

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 10:22 AM

> so what has consumer confidence have to do with this?

Absolutely nothing. Just like this article:

1 in 4 mortgages 'underwater'

Report shows 10.7 million borrowers are stuck with mortgages whose property values are less than what the they owe.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In a sign that more foreclosures could be on the horizon, 23% of people with mortgages owe more than their home is worth, according to a report released Tuesday.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 24, 2009 10:32 AM

bupe rocks. SIX TO ONE!!!

Posted by: denton at November 24, 2009 10:32 AM

I hope that when all the smoke clears it is obvious that the only thing that all of the protesters did is make that part of Brooklyn much much uglier for the rest of all of our lives. The current design is much uglier than the original proposal which would have been underway if there had not been all of the protest.

Posted by: someotherdude at November 24, 2009 10:40 AM

and 100% of people with credit card debt own mostly worthless sh*t they bought (95% made in China).

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 24, 2009 10:40 AM

"bigger names joining the team now that it is actually in NYC and atop mass transit links."

Big name players making in excess of $10 million a year are anxious to give up their Escalades and ride the C train to their home games?

New York is a big market, and Brooklyn is a suburban part of that market, but basketball players are international celebrities well beyond any local market, no matter how big. Lebron, Dwyane Wade, Yao, etc., have become global properties without a New York base.

Why this is an appropriate use of public resources is beyond me, except for Ratner's ability to buy politicians.

Posted by: Sparafucile at November 24, 2009 10:46 AM

Sad news for any of us who like browstone Brooklyn. The legal system sucks...normally courts are condemned for being over-zealous; in this case saying "it's not the role of the courts to intervene in agency decisions, given the wide latitude in state law" is an abrogation of their role.

TO all you joyous people out there, are you same ones who say "it's my property, I can do anything with it" and damn the tenants? If so can you not see the irony in the state being able to condemn perfectly good property?

On a related note, the NYT article today on how the right and the left sides of the spectrum are joining in to protest the over-criminalization of federal law, and in general, the increasing fuzziness ond overuse of the legal system.

Of which this is a prime example.

Posted by: cmu at November 24, 2009 10:54 AM

Meant to say "of which this is a prime non-example"

Posted by: cmu at November 24, 2009 10:56 AM

"except for Ratner's ability to buy politicians" Well, there's your answer isn't it? And his ability to buy construction unions and lie to poor people about what they are going to get out of this nonsense. DDDB press conference at 12:30 today in front of Freddy's. The fight goes on!

Posted by: babs at November 24, 2009 11:01 AM

"state being able to condemn perfectly good property"

I'm OK with the state condemning perfectly good property to build a road, a school, a park. It's when they do it to hand the property over to a private developer, for a project whose public benefit was dubious even to begin with and now is widely acknowledged to be out of the picture, that I have a problem.

Posted by: Sparafucile at November 24, 2009 11:04 AM

"I hate Landmarks telling me what kind of windows I have to use in my home."

"I love the ESDC taking my home and giving it to another developer."

Yeah. Go try to rationalize that.

Posted by: chuck at November 24, 2009 11:04 AM

Perhaps one day, before I'm dead, there will be something built there. Bruce Ratner is most certainly the right developer to get it done, and I don't mind if my tax money goes toward making it happen. This is a logical area for a sports arena and additional housing. I also don't care if Ratner gets rich (or richer) in the process. It's not a perfect project, by any means, but overall it makes sense. The arena will create economic opportunities which do not presently exist in that area. I guess you can argue about the quality of that business, but certainly it isn't there presently. All DDDB did, in my opinion, was to create as many obstacles as possible to the first real progress at this site since at least the 1960s. I'm sure they're not finished, but it's nice to see their BS isn't working.

Posted by: East New York at November 24, 2009 11:08 AM

right on eny.

Posted by: denton at November 24, 2009 11:12 AM

So depressing - almost as bad as the Times reporting (they are still talking about 16 residential buildings - which even Ratner admits are not in the cards - and ignore the fact that 8 acres of "open space" has become 7 acres of surface parking.) Do any of the pro-posters really believe this is a "public benefit" - or one that is worth anywhere near the public subsidy?
The extent to which politicians and press were bought off in this whole awful process will probably become some sort of landmark urban (non)planning case study. I recently heard that "Brooklyn Matters", a great little independent film on Atlantic Yards has been shown on public TV stations across the country - but not in New York. Seems there was fear of alienating Ratner as a PBS donor.

Posted by: Brooklyn Red at November 24, 2009 11:13 AM

Right on East New York.

I'm ready for something other than a gravel lot in that spot. I like basketball, and the idea of Brooklyn being home to a professional sports team, even if that team might go an entire season without a win.

Bring it on.

Posted by: Lothar of the Clinton Hill People at November 24, 2009 11:26 AM

The problem is citing economic benefit without citing the cost spend to get that benefit.

The vast majority of the expense is a simple transfer of assets from us to Ratner. We build him a stadium and the Nets increase in value exponentially. A small proportion of the cost will go to construction and generate a small economic benefit (relative to total cost.)

Essentially we're spending $300,000 on a $20,000 Chevy and rationalize it by citing the economic benefit of constructing the car.

Posted by: Johnny at November 24, 2009 11:26 AM

"even if that team might go an entire season without a win."

If you've noticed, the Knicks aren't too much better. One "impossible dream" at a time!

Posted by: East New York at November 24, 2009 11:30 AM

read the decision folks.

only one judge got it. or wanted to get it.

the evaluation that the majority did was that since the esdc is a legislatively enabled body with a specified set of attack points available as per ligislation that the findings of the esdc are beyond review because the legislature says its beyond review.

pretty pathetic.

Posted by: bkn4life at November 24, 2009 11:30 AM

I think ENY has said it all. All I can add is that I will be a happy man the day the shovels start moving some earth.

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 11:34 AM

>>"Big name players making in excess of $10 million a year are anxious to give up their Escalades and ride the C train to their home games?"

Um no, genius (and interesting that you single out the C as it's one of the few trains that isn't at Atlantic/Pacific) ... but more fans will come given better access to millions of people. More fans => more money & exposure => more appeal to players.

If you don't believe more folks will come to the Barclays Center than an arena in the middle of the Jersey swamp, you're seriously delusional.

Posted by: be_rude at November 24, 2009 11:37 AM

Before everyone condemns Goldstein and DDDB as "losers" you should notice that there is still nothing in AY. all the public funding going to an arena? What a waste. What was that old saying? Fiddling while Rome burns?

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 11:49 AM

I'm well aware the C train stops about a block away on Fulton Street. The NBA's salary structure means that players can always make more staying with their present team, as long as that team wants them. Exposure is about TV and internet. A full arena makes a nice backdrop for the TV programming, but from an individual player's perspective, it doesn't matter.

There's a perfectly good arena in Newark, right on top of NJ Transit, Path, and the Newark City Subway. Those taxpayers already got swindled on that deal, so they may as well make the best of it by having two teams play there.

40% of the metro region's population lives west of the Hudson River. If not for the taxpayer subsidies Ratner is getting, this would not be a wise business move for the Nets.

Posted by: Sparafucile at November 24, 2009 11:50 AM

Maybe I could sell peeled oranges and bottled water to the people stuck in traffic.

Posted by: Grumpy at November 24, 2009 12:05 PM

Grumpy- try little sandwiches too. You don't know how long they'll be stuck out there.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 12:09 PM

Do you think I could join the Freelancers Union and get benefits?

Posted by: Grumpy at November 24, 2009 12:15 PM

Too bad, that ugly piece of s**t may very well be built. One consolation may be that with just the arena, and no other buildings likely to be built, Ratner and FCR are likely to loose a lot of money, even with the vast amount of corporate welfare they've been granted. That would serve them right. It's small comfort though, because we'll be stuck with the useless arena.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at November 24, 2009 12:18 PM

Grumpy- absolutely! And then when you expand you could hire me and give me health care. And pay into a pension plan for me. And give me free cat food for my animals. And a metrocard :)

Bob- agree!

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 12:23 PM

We are in the middle of a crippling recession with spiraling unemployment. Im sure on some level the powers that be (Bloomberg, Paterson, Albany) have decided that the best (and quickest) way to stimulate some job growth is through large scale constuction projects like Atlantic Yards. Against that backdrop, even with the myriad of pending lawsuits, the courts will likely show great deference to the wishes of the ESDC. It may take donkey's years, but (with the clearance of this major court hurdle) Atlantic Yards will happen.

Posted by: FtGreeneCorey at November 24, 2009 12:28 PM

TV and internet are merely the conduits for exposure. The volume of TV play and internet traffic is directly correlated to the size of the fan base, which is correlated to attendance. Do the Memphis Grizzlies or Minnesota Timberwolves get the same media exposure as the Lakers, Celtics or Knicks (even though the Knicks absolutely suck!)?? You know the answer.

If you don't think the Brooklyn Nets will have a bigger fan base and generally be a more marketable proposition than the NJ Nets, fine, but I think most reasonable folks will disagree.

Posted by: be_rude at November 24, 2009 12:30 PM

Your hired bxgrl! Who said those job numbers were phony, with all the high rollin' b-ball players spending their millions in Brooklyn, good times are here to stay!

Posted by: Grumpy at November 24, 2009 12:48 PM

EastNewYork: AGREED.

Posted by: JPD at November 24, 2009 12:57 PM

I'm hoping that this case will prove to be a watershed event, signaling the start of a new era in NYC.

Since the demise of the Robert Moses era, we have overdosed on Jane Jacobs, imho. Inordinate attention was given to the texture of specific neighborhoods, while in the meantime we lost our ability to think big, to think of the city as a whole. Excluding the third water tunnel (which was done out of necessity) the last grand project in this town was the Verrazano bridge, which opened somewhere around 1964.

I am hoping that we can now find a balance between the two. Moreover, given that governments at all levels are reaching their fiscal limits (and huge liabilities like medicare for the baby boomers loom on the horizon), public-private partnerships such as AY are the only way to move ahead.

I think we've also come full circle in another way. One of the reasons that O'Malley took the Dodgers to LA is that the city refused his request to put a stadium on the site of the LIRR station. Well, here we are. Brooklyn will be getting a pro sports team, on the very site that O'Malley requested. Ironic.

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 1:01 PM

Public-private partnerships???

We give billions to Ratner to receive by FCR's own admission , almost nothing in return. That's not partnership. That's crime.

We're paying several times what the Nets are worth to rent them for a few years. This sound like a good "partnership" to anyone? Have nothing against the Nets. But I don't understand why I'm renting them for many times what they're worth to buy.

Posted by: Johnny at November 24, 2009 1:17 PM

Grumpy- I think I need to get a Breen card- seeing as I was born in the Bronx and emigrated to Brooklyn.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 1:19 PM

What Johnny said!

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 1:20 PM

Johny;

All I can say is this: if you ask any old-time Brooklynite (like my dad)about the effects of the Dodgers moving away, they will tell you that it was devastating to the borough (along with the folding of the Brooklyn Eagle). It confirmed to many people, throughout the US, their growing perception that Brooklyn was washed-up, a place to flee, a place for only those with no other options.

Conversely, I see the return of a pro sports team as a confirmation that Brooklyn is once again a desirable place to live.

You might scoff at the notion that a pro-sports team is necessary to confirm such a renaissance, and I personally agree. However, that is present-day reality.

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 1:25 PM

johnny:

can't belive i am saying this being a sports fan, but...i would settle for a real newspaper again.

if the populace were regularly informed by reasoned analysis goldstein et al would have more of the public behind them.

Posted by: bkn4life at November 24, 2009 1:32 PM

I suppose this was inevitable... I just hope my currently sleepy and quiet corner (Carlton and Prospect Place) doesn't become clogged with construction traffic, and later, traffic of fans attending the Nets games. We shall see.

Posted by: bklynrosie at November 24, 2009 1:32 PM

What Johnny said, indeed.

Betcha real "affordable" housing, the kind Ratner recruited the now invisible ACORN, Rev. Daughtry, and BUILD to support, will NEVER be built. There will always be a million excuses - we couldn't get the bond money, there are too many market rate units out there, we need the space for parking, we never promised to build on site, and we can't afford to buy another site, blah, blah, blah.

I'm also cynical enough to state outright that apart from a few token high profile jobs, the people who thought that belonging to BUILD would help them in the building trades will never see full time, well paying, skilled construction jobs, either. Right after having the BUILD guys make spectacles of themselves at FCNY functions and city meetings, Ratner started tearing down Ward's Bakery. He did not use BUILD members, as it was subbed out to some construction company that used their guys. Way to go, and a portent of the future.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at November 24, 2009 1:35 PM

A sports team makes a place desirable to live. Really? Is that why everyone flocks to live in the Bronx? I gotta say having been born and raised in Brooklyn and having grown up hearing all about Ebbets field and the Dodgers games from my parents I never heard about how Brooklyn became a less desirable place to live when they packed up and left.

Posted by: rukiddingme at November 24, 2009 1:40 PM

Rukiddingme;

I would advise that you read Pete Hamill's writing on the matter. He writes about the three death blows to Brooklyn's image: a) the Dodgers moving out; b) the folding of the Eagle and c) the closing of the Brooklyn Navy Yard.

His words, not mine.

Another book on the subject is "When Brooklyn Was The World".

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 1:44 PM

The Dodgers left 52 years ago. Time to grow up and let it go.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 24, 2009 1:46 PM

I think if you really want to improve Brooklyn's status as a desirable place to live, take every dollar earmarked for this boondoggle and spend it on improving schools and the subways.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 24, 2009 2:06 PM

The 1990's were Manhattan's decade, with an explosion of development, cleaning up the city and stemming crime. People from all over the world once again saw New York (and specifically Manhattan) as THE destination. Many New Yorkers griped about the "Disney-fication" of New York, but around the world New York's star never shined brighter.

The 2000's has been Washington DC's decade. New development was been pervasive, companies started moving back into D.C. from Maryland and Virginia and young families (black, white and brown) choose the District over the suburbs to raise their children. Obama's election was just the cherry on top in terms of the world's perception of Washington, D.C. as a world class city.

I firmly believe that with completion of Brooklyn Bridge Park, Willoughby Square Park, the completion of the Williamsburg Waterfront, the refurbishment of Downtown Brooklyn, the expansion of BAM, and yes Atlantic Yards, the Barclays Center, the Brooklyn Nets (and hopefully a certain LeBron James), the 20-teens will be Brooklyn's decade...the world will finally recognize Brooklyn as the great American city this it always has been.

Posted by: FtGreeneCorey at November 24, 2009 2:10 PM

Its really interesting to me that, for some of the most diverse, well educated and worldly people in the world, Brooklynites are also some of the most provincial, insular and narrow minded people in this country. I have made the point several times on Brownstoner that, despite what we Brooklynites may think, around the country and around the world, people have the perception that Brooklyn is dirty, scummy, unsafe and the type of place that people "end up" if they can't afford to live Manhattan, Westchester, Long Island, etc. We obviously know that the foregoing is untrue, but it seems as if the attitude of a lot of people on this blog and a lot of Brooklynites in general is "who f*cking cares what THEY think". Nonetheless, I honestly believe that, that with the Nets arrival in Brooklyn, combined with the continued improvement of our infastructure, around the world people's perception of Brooklyn will change for the better...and we all stand to benefit from that.

Posted by: FtGreeneCorey at November 24, 2009 2:23 PM

FtGreeneCorey;

I travel a great deal in my work, and couldn't agree with you more. I still receive alot of strange looks when I tell my clients (in other parts of the country) that I'm from Brooklyn.

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 2:28 PM

I'm sorry, FtGreeneCorey but the Brooklyn renaissance has been going on for quite some time and without the Nets. the idea a sports arena where you can buy beer during the game is going to do anything for our image is pretty odd. Brooklyn doesn't need a sports arena to be world-class. It has plenty of other assets.

If anything has made an impact on the image of Brooklyn it is landmarking neighborhoods and the preservation movement, the much maligned "creative professionals" who have moved here and the fact that Manhattan is too expensive, too crowded and too overdone.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 2:35 PM

Once again Bxgrl, we can agree to disagree. Please keep in mind that I DO value and repect your opinion...but I really believe that it's hard to overstate the value that people around the world place on sports. Despite whatever great things may have been going on in Indianapolis, I think most people there would agree that the city became "world class" when the Colts arrived...(irrespective of what one might think about country music) Nashville is undoubtedly one of this country's cultural mecca's, but to most people there, it really became a "big league" city when the Titans arrived. Conversely, when the Oilers left Houston and the Browns left Cleveland each city's collective heart was torn apart...only to be made whole again when the NFL came back to town. We all want great schools for our kids and world class cultural institutions, but please don't underestimate the value that sports can have on the collective psyche of a city.

Posted by: FtGreeneCorey at November 24, 2009 2:58 PM

Indianapolis is a "world class" city?

In what world?

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 24, 2009 3:14 PM

FtGreeneCorey: Indianapolis is a "world class" city? Please. I think you are OVERestimating the value that sports teams can have.

Posted by: bklynrosie at November 24, 2009 3:17 PM

DitmasSnark and Bklynrosie, snark, snark all you want. Like I said above, the typical Brooklyn response is "who the f*ck cares what THEY think", but if a neutral observer looks at our "mainstreet" Flatbush Avenue in general (or the corner of Flatbush and Atlantic in particular) and compares that to Indianapolis' "mainstreet" Pennsylvania Street (where Conseco Fieldhouse is located), what city do you think THEY would consider "world class"?

Posted by: FtGreeneCorey at November 24, 2009 3:27 PM

An ironic confluence of sentiments from benson – lamenting the absence of “master builders” like Moses while at the same time lamenting the fact that the “city” wouldn’t go along with O’Malley and refused to build a new stadium for the Dodgers at Atlantic and Flatbush. It wasn’t the “city” that nixed the idea – it was Moses (who, admittedly, often thought he was the city) who was determined to build a stadium in Queens.

I also travel a fair amount and have been close to astonished by the number of people who do know Brooklyn – and especially the ones who say “my kid(s) live there and love it .I hear it’s the happening place.” Sure, there are regional stereotypes throughout the country (everybody in Kansas lives on a farm, everybody in Vermont collects maple syrup), but in case you haven’t noticed, Brooklyn has been winning “livable neighborhood” awards and as Bxgrl noted, the renaissance has been going on for a while.

The Brooklynites I know who reminisce about the Dodgers tend to be the same folks who remember stickball in the streets and sitting on the stoop and knowing the folks on the block – concepts that seem alien to developers who make no accommodation to the need for scale and shared space that can keep a location feeling like a "neighborhood". The nostalgia is not just for a team that can be cheered on, but for a sense of place – which I sure don’t get with Atlantic Yards (well, maybe a sense of awful place).

I respectfully disagree with Corey when he says that when people think “Nashville” they think “Titans” (music, maybe) – and I think he in fact points to one of the big problems in the teams/owners/stadium mix – it’s become more and more of a one night stand for demanding owners who don’t really give a damn about where a team is located.

To me, the biggest problem with how the Atlantic Yards process is moving along (apart from the problems about size and scale) is about the lies and blatantly false promises that were made to swing this development deal. The promises of jobs and affordable housing have disappeared. And even if you accept that there may be some vague collective psyche benefit to having a home town sports team (which I don’t buy), the cost is way too high for such an ephemeral “high”. This project is not going to help the infrastructure – it’s going to put a terrific strain on it. Historically, stadiums do not help a local economy.

I’m with Ditmassnark , Johnny and the rest on this – what a terrible waste of dollars.

Posted by: Brooklyn Red at November 24, 2009 3:44 PM

ftgreenecorey - is totally right - i've made the same points before. anyone who owns property has to fight for continued major major developments like AY and the waterfront and high rises in WB and downtown Brooklyn to change mass negative perceptions about Brooklyn. yes, there's been change up till now, but seriously, i run into all sorts of people all the time (usually through my kid, not through my NYC biz dealings) who live in places like the Village and Chelsea even who are totally clueless about brooklyn and wouldn't even consider living here!

the nets in brooklyn is HUGE - brooklyn will be on the national scene then.

of course, it's necessary and of course, the creators should be rewarded.

Posted by: wine lover at November 24, 2009 3:54 PM

Thank you Brooklyn Red. You said everything much better than I have the skill or patience to do.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 24, 2009 3:54 PM

BrooklynRed;

You are not quite right about Moses and the proposed Dodger stadium.

Moses had no formal jursidiction over the matter. What is true is that O'Malley went to Moses to ask for his support, KNOWING that he was the only one who could "get things done". Moses refused to support the idea of a stadium at the Atlantic terminal. He thought that Flushing Meadows was a more appropriate place.

It seems to me that when you support Moses on this site, people take it to mean that you believe all of his decisions were flawless. Like all great men, he had his pros and cons. What is true is that when all is said and done, his legacy is everywhere in NYC. He accomplished a great deal, which is alot more than can be said for most public figures today. Moreover, he did so while NOT enriching himself. He was born into a wealthy family, and after devoting his life to public service, left an estate of around $50K. Again, not too many folks around like that these days.

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 4:04 PM

ENY said it well.

I'll just add that I find it more than a bit amusing how many people here (and around Brooklyn) seem to think that they are more equipped to interpret the Constitution and 200+ years of jurisprudence concerning Eminent Domain then the Supreme Court of the United States and the NY State Court of Appeals (one of the more respected appeals courts in the country).

It wasnt even a close call after Kelo.

Not that I can take that much glee - I am sure right now the braintrusts at DDDB are thinking up new frivolous lawsuits to file!

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 4:05 PM

One last thought for winelover,ftgreencorey,benson and anyone who think a stadium at Atlantic Yards is going to be a big help to Brooklyn - as an interesting exercise, google "sports stadiums and the local economy" to see what comes up (hint - you might not like what pops up)

Posted by: Brooklyn Red at November 24, 2009 4:06 PM

Indeed Brooklyn Red. Well said.

FtGreeneCorey- I respect your opinion as well even when I may not agree with it. I do have to say that I also think you are putting too much emphasis on the role of sports and Brooklyn's image. Sports and money go hand in hand- but that doesn't necessarily trickle out to the surrounding community. The Bronx is a perfect case. As far as collective City hearts being torn apart over the abandonment by a sports team- that seems very overwrought. After the media frenzy and the diehard fans' cursing, the cities still survived, people's lives go in. Most people don't spend their lives living or dying by the local sports team.

We have serious problems in this city that need to be addressed and Ratner is not the answer. Jobs? Yes- for the construction industries. As good as it is to have those jobs, its a closed industry, and the project is a finite one. We need a much more intelligent long range plan if things are to get better, and that means addressing jobs and education all across the board, in every field and at every level. AY is a stop-gap, and not even a good one. For all the public monies invested in it, there is a small and iffy return.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 4:11 PM

"the world will finally recognize Brooklyn as the great American city this it always has been", and others.
Local cheerleading is great and all but Brooklyn is not a city but a big large part of New York City. I don't see the value/reason for trying to for this separate identity- all this manhattan vs brooklyn nonsense, childishness.
The value of arena should be evaluated in terms of what can do for NYC.
(and I don't think people in Brooklyn are any more provincial than people in other parts of NYC).

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 24, 2009 4:18 PM

"I am sure right now the braintrusts at DDDB are thinking up new frivolous lawsuits to file!"

Most assuredly.

Posted by: East New York at November 24, 2009 4:21 PM

fsrg- it is a fact that very few- if any- Supreme Court decisions are cast in stone. Just a glance at the history of Brown vs the Board of Education shows that. Interpretations of the Constitution change over time- sometimes for the better, sometimes not. And it's naive to think that the justices are not politically influenced- no one would ever accuse Thomas of being liberal or voting that way on a decision. Then there are the dissenters- so essentially Supreme Court decisions are voted on. They are not always unanimous. That said, eminent domain has been redefined several times, not in a good way. Add to that,states can apply it differently so what we have is a hot mess, not necessarily a definitive definition.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 4:21 PM

bxgrl Constitutional interpretations may change over time, but that time is (and should be) generations - Kelo was decided FOUR years ago.

This was a slam-dunk

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 4:28 PM

And immediately after that some states tightened up their eminent domain laws. What is and what should be don't alwys match- these days everything changes quickly, why should Supreme Court decisions need to wait generations?

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 4:33 PM

And NYS could have as well

why should Supreme Court decisions need to wait generations? - Cause our entire Common Law system is based in precedent, and so if the decisions were just changed based upon purely immediate interpretations (politics) than the words would effectively have no meaning AND we would simply have 9 unelected legislators - which although they sometimes seem like thats what they are - they arent and shouldnt be.

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 4:38 PM

See Hakeem Jeffries's statement on the subject: http://dddb.net/php/latestnews_Linked.php?id=2472

Posted by: babs at November 24, 2009 4:42 PM

Brooklyn Red, EXTREMELY well said, you too, bxgrl.

The sports team as metaphor for a city seems a bit stretched. Sure it's great the Yankees are a great team, but really, what has Yankee Stadium done for the Bronx? People living 3 blocks away in run down apartments are not positively affected by the success or presence of the Yankees. Having the Nets here (the worst team in basketball, who, if they are lucky, may actually win a game before moving here) is not like having some kind of good luck talisman for Brooklyn. Major league sports may be big business, but that business does not seem to trickle down into the communities.

I think the arena is a giant red herring tossed into the ring to get people all worked up with talk of Brooklyn pride and winning teams, while actually a smoke screen to the facts of misuse of eminent domain, back room deals, tax payer betrayals, and big money going back into big money pockets. Like a big red herring left out too long, it massively stinks.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at November 24, 2009 4:47 PM

MM - there are two effects - one is measurable, in jobs, dollars, taxes, etc and another is more subtle (and I aknowledge difficult to porve)

I firmly believe that had the Yankees not been in the Bronx, the boro would have fallen way further - it didnt hurt to have Howard Cosell say the Bronx is burning on national TV either.
And I believe that the Yankees building their stadium there again, encourages investment and growth that otherwise wouldnt have happened.

But like the jobs "saved" by the stimulus we can really prove it.

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 4:53 PM

Folks;

This says it all:

http://bk.ly/3n

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 4:53 PM

And then there is the aftermath of the Kelo decision

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/nyregion/13pfizer.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Kelo%20decision&st=cse

Posted by: Brooklyn Red at November 24, 2009 4:54 PM

Oh and BTW - I dont support AY cause I think the arena will make Brooklyn great - I support it because mass entertainment venues are nice to have and they and dense communities should be built around transportation hubs.

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 4:56 PM

"Sure it's great the Yankees are a great team, but really, what has Yankee Stadium done for the Bronx? People living 3 blocks away in run down apartments are not positively affected by the success or presence of the Yankees."

My son's 1/2 sister, who has been chronically un- and under-employed and literally lives blocks from the new stadium. She is now a host at the steak house in the new Stadium. It's probably the best job she's had in years. Is it a path to future success? That's largely up to her. But she did benefit from the presence of the new stadium, as others undoubtedly will in Brooklyn. If the damn place ever gets built.

Posted by: East New York at November 24, 2009 5:02 PM

fsrg- in theory I would agree with you. But sadly the reality is very different. Roe vs Wade, Gay marriage- all things that should have been decided long ago are still up for grabs because when all is said and done, we don't have impartial justices, we have 9 justices interpreting the Constitution according to their education, upbringing and even religion. The Constitution is the basis of our system, but precedent is not necessarily a great way to decide law, especially if it locks us into bad law or poor interpretation of the Constitution. At one time the Dred Scott decision was considered a legal precedent. Would anyone seriously use that in a court of law today? In some things we interpret too loosely, in others, not narrowly enough. Oh well- I guess that's why we shrug our shoulders and say we're only human.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 5:03 PM

fsrq - The overwhelming number of studies on stadium impact simply don't support your wishful thinking about positive effects. This arena business is, as MM points out, such a red herring. As the saying goes - "follow the money"

Posted by: Brooklyn Red at November 24, 2009 5:06 PM

I think this will certainly make Brooklyn a world-class money-laundering spot for Russian Billionaires. These state authorities take the lower bid on the land and then issue the bonds to "rinse" some of that nice dirty money...

Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at November 24, 2009 5:28 PM

And the new Yankee Stadium, with its mall and food court and restaurants, is actually hurting local business, as detailed in numerous recent articles:

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/new-yankee-stadium-hurting-local-businesses-owners-say

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/archives/2009/11/3908_new_yankee_stad_5.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/29/yankee-stadium-costing-area-businesses

etc., etc.

Posted by: babs at November 24, 2009 5:31 PM

if the populace were regularly informed by reasoned analysis goldstein et al would have more of the public behind them.

Posted by: bkn4life at November 24, 2009 1:32 PM

This is one major reason why DDDB has failed so miserably. They blatantly say that anyone who disagrees with their version of events is stupid. Nice work, guys. It's taken you so very far.

D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L! D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!

Posted by: Big Jugs at November 24, 2009 6:28 PM

Bxgrl we are talking about judicial decisions. Eminent domain, abortion, segregation are always open to legislation. This is a democracy, mostly the will of the people (for good and bad) should have the largest sway. I for one would not want to live in a country where an oligarchy of judges were the main makers of law. And I think if you understood the ramifications of what you are suggesting you wouldn't either. But no matter...it is the bedrock of our country and it is not changing.

As for the benefitsof the arena, I said that a lot of it is not measurable IMO and besides that's not my basis of support, so why you are all citing $ based articles to refute my point is beyond me.

Posted by: fsrg at November 24, 2009 6:39 PM

fsrg- just because we disagree does not mean I don't understand the ramifications. I most certainly do- as for an oligarchy of judges...well... I don't want judges making law wither- I want them to clarify it which unfortunately leads us back to the same place we were. It isn't the Constitution that changes- its the interpretation. And these days it seems sometimes that translates into legislating from the bench. But again- you're right. Its our system and it is not changing anytime soon.

Posted by: bxgrl at November 24, 2009 7:27 PM

Remember how much L.A. really started to suck after it lost it's NFL team?

Posted by: tgnyc2 at November 24, 2009 8:23 PM

So Big Jugs;

Tell us how you really feel about this decision....

Posted by: benson at November 24, 2009 9:01 PM

yes ... the will of the people ... i'm entitled to everything, including a job, but i don't want one or need one b/c i'm entitled to everything ...

if we lived in a functional society, losers would pay costs and this selfish poser goldstein would've never brought his first sham suit. take your stipend and move to phoenix you cornball.

Posted by: BrooklynLove at November 24, 2009 9:16 PM

The takeaway from Benson's link:

"But what could unite Brooklyn now? Certainly not the New Jersey Nets."

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 24, 2009 11:00 PM

« Open Thread BREAKING: Fire on Smith and Warren »

November 24, 2009

BREAKING: Goldstein et al Lose Eminent Domain Lawsuit

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions