Voices from the Atlantic Yards Debate
Last Thursday night, NewsHour with Jim Lehrer ran a segment on the Atlantic Yards debate, interviewing a number of the key players and voices on either side. Here are some excerpts: Marty Markowitz, Borough Pres: Sports have a way of infusing the municipality in which it’s in with that pride, that spirit. And we have…
Last Thursday night, NewsHour with Jim Lehrer ran a segment on the Atlantic Yards debate, interviewing a number of the key players and voices on either side. Here are some excerpts:
Marty Markowitz, Borough Pres: Sports have a way of infusing the municipality in which it’s in with that pride, that spirit. And we have lots of spirit in Brooklyn, you know that. I mean my attitude is if you don’t live in Brooklyn, forget about it.
Bertha Lewis, Acorn: It’s the most far-reaching housing agreement that’s ever been reached in this country. No one else has 50-50 — no one. It’s exhilarating and it is scary
Candace Carpenter, DDDB: They are asking for $2 billion in subsidies, which are taxpayers’ money, that will be utilized to line Ratner’s pockets. And we don’t have any input.
Laetitia James, City Council: It basically says things like good faith effort. It says things like, “we will try.” It says things like “we will consider.” It says things like “we will work with the government.” That’s not an ironclad agreement.
Jim Stuckey, FCR: There might be a need for eminent domain; there might be a need for condemnation; that is something that the state will decide.
Vince Burns, Tenant: If they wanted to take down my building to put in a police station or school – I’d had to leave where I am because I love the place — but I’d understand that – I mean, that’s fine — but this project is about one very wealthy man who wants to become wealthier by, you know, kicking me out.
Developing Brooklyn [PBS NewsHour]
Babs are you seriously defending voting based soley on a parties name??? You would be a bit more persuasive if you didnt try to defend everything an anti-Atlantic Yard person does.
As for your argument against Eminent Domain you unfortunatly dont have the law on your side b/c as you may know the S Ct (also established in the same constitution) recently said Eminent Domain was not an unlawful siezure (even in circumstances akin to Atlantic Yards)
From the Bill of Rights:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
And what is the violation of eminent domain but a gussied-up form of unlawful seizure?
As you said David — yes our founding fathers for the most part did think that women and people of color (or basically anyone who was not a rich white man) were too dumb to have a say. And yes we have progressed since then. However, there are many people who vote for the Republican or Democratic Parties because of their names — ditto Communist, Socialist, Working Family, etc., etc.
Have you ever not heard of any of the candidates for an office and voted simply for the one who was Democratic/Republican/whatever because that’s how you generally vote? Happens all the time, so cut Shahn some slack (and we still don’t know for sure he even voted for the guy).
Community input is one of the founding principles of our country? Funny I missed that one in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. Actually if anything one of the founding principles was to keep people deemed to be too dumb from having a say. And while histroy has proven how misguided this principle was (along with the criteria in determining who was fit to exercise their rights), those who base their vote soley on a parties name might just lend support to the opposing viewpoint.
Community input is one of the founding principles of our country? Funny I missed that one in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. Actually if anything one of the founding principles was to keep people deemed to be too dumb from having a say. And while histroy has proven how misguided this principle was (along with the criteria in determining who was fit to exercise their rights), those who base their vote soley on a parties name might just lend support to the opposing viewpoint.
I don’t think Shahn said he voted for them, just that he gave them his approval (which might be construed to mean he voted for them, but maybe not). In any event, it really doesn’t matter if he voted for their mayoral candidate as we all know he doesn’t have a chance of winning.
There is, however, one credible candidate on this party’s slate — Erlene King, from East Flatbush, a Democrat whose petitions were challenged by another candidate. She accepted the RTD party’s offer to run on their line, but has carefully kept her distance from their loonier theories.
And community input into Brooklyn’s development is completely essential (whether we individually like that input or not), because that’s one of the founding principles of our country — what Ratner & Co are calling eminent domain really amounts to unlawful seizure of private property because the community is not being given a say into it.
And watch out when the ACORN members who are also, in some cases, RTD voters find out Bruce has lied to them and they are getting neither jobs nor housing and certainly won’t be able to afford Nets tickets…
Nice Job Shahn way to support a racist organization! I hope your proud that you voted simply based upon the NAME of the party. And you wonder why many of us are afraid of community input into Brooklyn’s development – look how people vote
From the parties web site:
“APARTHEID is NO longer in South Africa it has has found a New Home the New York City area, and the Jewish people are behind it 100%. After the hard fighting we did to end APARTIHEID in the 3rd world countries we had know idea the Jewish people would even think of doing such a thing but they did. The State of New York has set aside a City just for the Jewish people (MONSEY, NY.) go there. (Don’t take my word for it), and then go to Brooklyn, NY.:
http://rentistoodamnhigh.org/
Is it a joke or there are for real?
If it is for real they are nuts.
I am goint to start Morgage is too damn hight party or Apartments cost too much party
Give me the break
Hee, hee Shahn — I know it’s a funny name the RTD party, but I think I remember reading somewhere recently that Jimmy McMillan, their candidate for mayor, blamed the current lack of affordable apartments on the “Jewish People.” This sounds like another scam we don’t need — and anyone who collects enough signatures can get on the ballot.
Holy shit. I just voted, and I had my first experience with the “Rent Is Too Damn High Party”. I had to give them my approval. I can’t believe they got on the ballot. I had never heard of them before.