Goldstein et al. File Suit Over AY Eminent Domain
Three homeowners, along with six renters and the owner of Freddy’s Bar, sued Governor Pataki, Mayor Bloomberg and Bruce Ratner in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn yesterday over the “misuse of government’s power to take property by eminent domain.” The Atlantic Yards proposal is premised on the abuse of eminent domain, said Matthew D. Brinckerhoff,…
Three homeowners, along with six renters and the owner of Freddy’s Bar, sued Governor Pataki, Mayor Bloomberg and Bruce Ratner in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn yesterday over the “misuse of government’s power to take property by eminent domain.” The Atlantic Yards proposal is premised on the abuse of eminent domain, said Matthew D. Brinckerhoff, the plaintiffs’ lead lawyer. It would mean the taking of one citizen’s property to benefit a powerful and influential private citizen, he said. The suit also claims that the politicians and developer failed to seek adequate community input. According to the NY Post, Mayor Bloomberg laughed when asked about the suit’s chances of stopping the project. “The Atlantic Yards project is something that Brooklyn, and this city, really needs,” he said. What do you think the suit’s impact will be?
Groups Aiming to Block AY Cite Eminent Domain [NY Law Journal]
Suit Against AY Challenges Eminent Domain [NY Times]
Suit Seeks to Dunk Arena [NY Post]
AY Project Abuses Eminent Domain, Suit Says [NY Sun]
Legal Shot Fired in Brooklyn’s Atlantic Yards Fight [Curbed]
Photo by threecee
Goldstein not goldberg antisemite!
N-O-D-E-A-L-Y-E-T!!!
I think the law suit servers another, important purpose, which is to bring the light of publicity to the back room dealing of the ESDC and all the shady and sleazy things that Ratner has done. Just as Iraq and the war eventually caught up to the current administration I think that public opinion is solidifying against this project and its many faults and that the court case will expose them, making it impossible for the politicians to simply rubber stamp it.
D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!!!
5:06, Who cares what people think after it’s over? The risk you take? File under W for whatever…Why would anyone NOT fight it because of what the public might think after the fact?
The arguments are simple and clear: it was the developers idea, not the ideas of our electeds, and there has been no transparency. It’s so obviously a conflict of interest and the area has been rapidly developing itself with no need for government intervention.
Yeah, but the issue isn’t whether this is the best use of public money, or even whether there is merely a better use. Courts don’t examine issues like that. They will look to see if there is a public benefit, see one, and then they will move on.
If you look at the money the government must put up and what it will receive in return it is a massive net loss – the city could doubtless subsidize the small amount of really affordable public housing at a fraction of the cost in lost taxes, concessions. This doesn’tsound like a benefit.
What is also funny to me is that if this was a public use, even a bad one, even a very bad one like the Cross Bronx Expressway, most of the arguments here wouldn’t add up to much of anything. Eminent domain is, and has been a strong government tool, and the great majority of abuse has been by and for public projects, not something like AY.
So, if we were talking about widening the roads in this area, or creating a tunnel to go under here, but needing this area to be seized to do it, then…no argument.
Do you all think that you can win a legal case by arguing that there is no public benefit here? Its not even close. There is clearly a public benefit. More traffic, reduced services, sewage problems, lack of schools and other institutions for the new tenants. Granted. The court will not consider this. All they will ask is if there is a public benefit. How many people do you think they will take testimony from that will speak to this issue? Alot. Then again, this case may not even get that far. All you have to do is to look at most eminent domain cases, say when the city is using it to give it to a third party to build subsidized housing, to see how low the standard is. The standard may need to change, but this lawsuit won’t do it.
Politically, the problem with this lawsuit is that once the anti-AY folks lose, alot of people will look at this and say, well, the Court thought it was ok, so it must be. That is the risk you take by taking anti-development movements like this to the courts.
I can’t believe what I’m hearing – clearly, you all work for DDDB.
Minions!