Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today
Today’s the day that the State Appeals Court begins hearing oral arguments in Goldstein et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation; the case was already dismissed in Federal Court. In an exhaustive round-up on Friday, Atlantic Yards Report discusses some reasons why plaintiffs (nine renters and owners in the footprint whose homes, like the three…

Today’s the day that the State Appeals Court begins hearing oral arguments in Goldstein et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation; the case was already dismissed in Federal Court. In an exhaustive round-up on Friday, Atlantic Yards Report discusses some reasons why plaintiffs (nine renters and owners in the footprint whose homes, like the three at left above, have been targeted for seizure by eminent domain) have a shot at winning but concedes that “the new case has to be considered a long shot.” Eminent domain arguments aside, the post reminds us of what an untransparent, back-room deal the MTA deal was: First, the MTA announced it would sell to Ratner, then it went through the motions of issuing an RFP; when Extel Development bid $150 million for the Yards versus Ratner’s $50 million, the MTA gave it to Ratner anyway. Nice. Anyway, after Appeals Court hears both sides’ arguments today, it’s expected to take a couple of months to issue a decision.
Oral Argument in State ED Case Approaches [AY Report]
Photo by Tracy Collins and Enhanced by No Land Grab
slopefarm:
i am am not a lawyer, but here are the basics as i saw them…
the judges attacked both sides. the points i mentioned before seem to be what they were coalescing around. justice eng seeemed to cut the appellants to the quick early on. i dont know if what was said could counter that perceived leaning. and the first(of two) appellant lawyers didnt do the case any favors in presentation.
spolino (sp?) seemed to have been very on top of the ramifications of leaning either way. i hope he realy evaluates what appears to be an end run around the state constitution.
if the appeal fails, the esdc is more powerful than robert moses ever was in that nothing can ever be questioned according to their attorneys.
especially their contention that no one has standing to challenge a property transfer by eminent domain/condemnation until the property has actually been transferred away from the initial owner. ever spot someone 20 points in a game to 21? michael jordan would be hard pressed to pull that one out.
the appellants basic case was that the ESDC has to go thru the process again because they allocated slum-clearance dollars to non-low income housing. and once sent back they an correct whatever flaws they see.
my fear is that an unenlightened judge will find for ratner solely because the opposition did not in their arguments make my second point well(if at all), that paying ratner directly and then condemning the vacant land skirts the slum clearance requirement that all housing be low income if it uses state dollars. it seems to be contrary to me that someone can evade a reqirement by giving a private developer $$ up front to “deal” with the slums and then condemn them with state money because they arent slums anymore since they were cleared by state money.
i am sure that any number of bloggers will correct me, but thats how i saw it.
and thanks for reminding me there are no posters on b’stoner who are bigger jerks than you.
ennuiater – me too. the other day as i passed by, workers were dumping wheelbarrows full of wet concrete directly into the basement window.
Also – the park won’t be boarded up for long. They are actually installing drainage and astro turf (to replace the concrete) for the soft ball fields.
MMHPH- I wonder what the heck the developer is doing to that one that’s being renovated. They’ve removed truckloads and truckloads of dirt and rocks from the basement. Wonder if this is going to be a condo conversion duplex type thing or rentals. I can’t imagine who would buy there with the view they’ve got of the scenic fire department and boarded up park.
Either way, depending on how the court case goes I may not be living on this block past June. Walking past empty lots and construction mess every day is losing it’s appeal.
bkn4,
Is that your take on what you thought the good points were, or what the judges responded to? Can you give any read on how the judges responded to each side?
No problem rob. I respect the fact that at least you seem to have a sense of humor…
hey p. heights what does “bones” mean in relation to your post? could you explain it to me in one sentence? i googled it and the first thing that came up was a tibia. 🙁 sorry i couldnt resist.
*r*
was at oral arguments. good points made.
#1
one of the takeaways is that the ESDC doent feel that there has to be “substantive” public benefits. just “any” public benefits.
basically, its ok to tke whatever you want as long as a single blade of grass is for public use. what a charade.
#2
also, an interesting mix point is that the slum clearance seems to have evaded state law by paying ratner to buy land, having him clear the buildings, demolishing and then condemning vacant land. i.e. no slum.
“slum” clearance, however, requires that only low income housing be built.
yet anothet charade.
ennuiater –
Agreed. These are pretty nice houses. The ones to the right always depressed me a little. But someone’s been renovating one of them over the past several months, and I’m trying to be optimistic that the “bones” of the houses are good enough that with a little TLC they can be nice. They remind me in a lot of ways of the houses just north of the old stone house in park slope. Of course Ratner already had his way and demolished the houses just to the left of this photo.
bxgirl – thanks for reminding me that there are posters on this site even more annoying than rob.