ESDC OK'd AY Without Seeing a Business Plan
So, get this. Assemblyman James Brennan has been trying for months to get the Empire State Development Corp to cough a copy of the business plan, finally suing the state agency last month. Turns out all the effort was just a waste of time since the ESDC never had a business plan from Ratner for…
So, get this. Assemblyman James Brennan has been trying for months to get the Empire State Development Corp to cough a copy of the business plan, finally suing the state agency last month. Turns out all the effort was just a waste of time since the ESDC never had a business plan from Ratner for the project. Instead, the agency now admits, it relied solely on a consultant’s report: “We brought in KPMG to take a look at all the forces involved,” says ESDC spokesman Errol Cockfield. “We feel very confident that that data allowed them to take a thorough look at the project in its long-term value for taxpayers.” One problem with that, though: KPMG says it never saw a comprehensive financial model either. Former city planning commissioner Ronald Shiffman summed up the common-sense position when he said, “One would believe they should look at it with a lot of due diligence, particularly with the amount of money they’re putting into this. It’s been a done deal from the beginning without anybody really looking at it.”
State Never Saw Business Plan For Atlantic Yards Project [NY Sun]
I suspect that my position is similar to that of many other brooklynites – I don’t oppose developing the area or the arrival of the basketball team or even the increased density/traffic, etc.
I do oppose leaving taxpayer dollars on the table, the use of eminent domain by a private developer, and elected officials acting in a covert, concerted effort to approve a plan without the input of the people who they are accountable to: taxpayers!
Objective Observer —
You hold the opposition to AY responsible for the fact that AY is such a flawed development plan??? Yeah, okay, and I hold the Democrat party responsible for Iraq. I mean, after all, a lot of them voted for it.
Anon at 10:17–
Whenever people are trying desparately to fight powers much greater than themselves, they try anything. The AY opposition started with a few individuals who were paying attention to what was happening in their neighborhood. It took a long time for anyone else to start paying attention. Also,
the AY opposition has never been a monolith. Some of your own objections to the objections of the opponents are also contradictory. In any case, your list has little to do with the merits of AY. Do you wish the project plans were different than they are? Did you do anything to try to change them?
Objective Observer? About as objective as Fox News.
I don’t object to a team in Brooklyn and I don’t object to development in AY. I object to a development in my neighborhood paid for with my tax dollars that’s being done without a single shred of consideration for anything other than Ratner’s bottom line.
I don’t hold the protesters responsible, disorganized or otherwise. I hold Ratner and the local, city and state politicians he bought responsible. 9:59’s right – perhaps one of the largest white collar crimes in history.
IMO, the AY opponents have failed, in part, due to their many contradictions:
1. Declaring ad nauseam that the AY will create “instant gentrificationâ€, while simultaneously insisting that it will thwart development on Vanderbilt Ave and make the general area unlivable.
2. Complaining that the people who drive to the Nets games will have no place to park – and then screeching when Ratner proposes a parking lot near Vanderbilt Avenue .
3. Complaining that the public commenting period is too short and presents only two opportunities for the public to testify – and then, after the period is extended and another chance to testify added, urging people not to attend.
4. Repeatedly endorsing candidates who haven’t a snowball’s chance in hell of winning and then declaring victory after losing miserably at the polls.
5. Insisting that the opposition represents a broad base of races and ethnicities, but every demonstration, march, or fundraiser shows a turnout that is vastly white.
6. Complaining that the density of the project is too high, but kicking and screaming when the idea of moving the affordable units offsite is proposed.
7. Claiming that density is the issue, only to switch to eminent domain when someone suggests size reduction as a solution. (Or vice versa)
8. Claiming that a person’s neighborhood should not be a factor in their opinions, and then repeatedly asking project supporters if they reside in or near the footprint.
9. Claiming that the project will make the area too expensive for poor and working-class residents, but never considering how the steady influx of college-educated professionals (i.e. THEM) has been doing just that for years.
10. Criticizing AY for being “out of context†development, but then endorsing a plan that contains buildings of 25+ stories.
11. Repeatedly claiming that Ratner is corrupt, only to (a) put the girlfriend of a prominent spokesperson on the payroll of DDDB, (b) delete from the DDDB archives a press release regarding an opponent’s racial faux paus, and (c) endorsing a political candidate who supports a murderous dictator in Africa.
12. Criticizing a BUILD employee for driving a Cadillac, but conveniently turning a blind eye to the obvious wealth of several prominent project opponents.
13. Claiming on dailyheights.com in April, 2005 that DDDB is a 501c3 (http://www.dailyheights.com/archives/423, comment #6), only to declare on dddb.net in September, 2006 that DDDB is a *pending* 501c3 (http://www.dddb.net/php/latestnews_ArcTxtSrch.php, 9/11/06).
14. Accusing anyone and everyone who supports the project of being a paid Ratner stooge, but accepting at face value to sincerity of anyone who opposes it.
Dear AY Opponents,
I think your heart is in the right place but your efforts have been an utter failure because you and your lot come across as radical extremists and thus have alienated most of the moderates on the issue of AY. The non-stop “sky is falling”/doomsday rhetoric of the opposition did not win you any support in the community. Instead, it made you less credible as it’s widely interpreted as non-sensical rethoric; with time people simply turned a deaf ear to everything coming out of the AY Report, No Land Grab and DDDB. Furthermore, Dan Goldstein was not the right person to lead this charge. He’s too volatile, emotional, unpredictable and easily offends. Where the position required a consensus builder – someone levelheaded with a centrist point of view who could work with FCR and bring about some of the concessions which would’ve been appropriate for the project – the opposition instead put forth Goldstein whose confrontational, slash and burn method of negotiation alienated everyone. The opposition’s first mistake was that they allowed the likes of Goldstein and the Hagans to wreck havoc on this entire process and become the face of the movement. Unfortunately, we are now faced with the grim reality that the zero sum game that was played will leave us with absolutely nothing in the end.
You want to know how you guys failed the community? (1) the scare tactics on falling real estate prices were pure horse shit and unbelievable; (2) you never provided a consistent message (a)too much luxury housing that would create more gentrification and drive up real estate values and make the community unaffordable or (b) too much low income housing which would set the community back ten years and reintroduce crime and drugs into the area (which one is it?); (3) Dan Goldstein calling African-Americans “slaves to their white masters” was a disgusting act of desperation; (4) the Barclay’s and slavery tactic was equally offensive; (5) an “all or nothing” approach to negotiation is never the right path to take when dealing with a project of this size and scope with so many different constituents; (6) failing to listen to AY supporters and portraying everyone who differed with the opposition as a monster or devil worshiper (the politics of personal destruction is a major turn off); (7) the offering of better suited sites (e.g., Coney Island, Red Hook and the Navy Yard with either no or very little transportation infrastructure) spoke of pure NIMBYISM; and (8) the opposition seriously misunderstood the psychological importance of a professional sport franchise in Brooklyn.
I’m sorry but this was not a well organized and orchestrated battle – it was marred by blunder after blunder after blunder. You guys were not the right people for the job and as a result valuable and necessary compromises were never achieved in a way that could have improved the project for everyone. I hold those individuals at the forefront of this debacle fully responsible for this sordid state of affairs.
Objective Observer
Is anyone really surprised by this? Of course the proper studies regarding ANY aspect of this project were never done in any standardized or meaningful way that demonstrates fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers of New York. Their plan worked brilliantly: get the deal done by circumventing proper channels through the endorsements of ALL of the big time G-men.
This has probably been one of the most spectacular white-collar crimes ever committed, right in front of everyone’s nose.
Thanks Jim Brennan. You have courage.
Hi Eryximachus!
I totally agree, no matter what you build there will be profitable. The question is, for who?
And also, why would you want the numbers to be reviewed by a “major force in the commercial real estate field”? Wouldn’t that present some kind of conflict of interest (they’d either be a competitor or a partner of Ratner’s)?
If you want someone to look at numbers and see if they make sense, you ask an accountant. And KPMG, for all its faults, is by no means a two-bit accountant.
All that said, I think the whole thing reeks of insiderism and corruption. And Eryxi, even you think that’s bad.
[i]And, KPMG hardly is a major force in the commercial real estate field. They might as well hire a 2 bit accountant. What do they know about real estate? NOTHING.[/i]
All the more reason that the ESDC shouldn’t have relied on KPMG.
Total nonsense. What constitutes a business plan? Several appraisals have been done for the land with various scenarios of development. What more do you need?
You have an enormous amount of vacant land in a major population center and transit hub. It doesn’t matter what you build there. It will be profitable. And developers never create detailed “business plans”. Development costs are HIGHLY variable – there is no way to accurately project how much it will cost to build these things over the next several years. Any numbers they provide are going to be a “best guess”.
As for the financial model – I can only assume they mean some kind of discounted cash flow. No one is going to hire a major account firm to “review” such a financial model – they would have them produce it! This is not difficult folks.
And, KPMG hardly is a major force in the commercial real estate field. They might as well hire a 2 bit accountant. What do they know about real estate? NOTHING.