Goldstein Offered Less Than What He Paid for Condo
On Saturday the Wall Street Journal ran an anti-eminent domain op-ed by the Manhattan Institute’s Nicole Gelinas. The writer argues that the state is masking an economic development motive in its push for the use of eminent domain in the Atlantic Yards footprint by falsely categorizing the area as blighted. AY Report notes, “not every…
On Saturday the Wall Street Journal ran an anti-eminent domain op-ed by the Manhattan Institute’s Nicole Gelinas. The writer argues that the state is masking an economic development motive in its push for the use of eminent domain in the Atlantic Yards footprint by falsely categorizing the area as blighted. AY Report notes, “not every block was thriving, but Prospect Heights was surely on the way up.” The piece also says that Develop Don’t Destroy’s Dan Goldstein is now being offered less money for his home, in the building above, than what he paid for it in 2003: “The letter they received in September informed them that the state will compensate them $510,000 for their property—less than what they bought it for and less than half of what Mr. Ratner offered to pay them for it four years ago. It’s also less per square foot than what Mr. Ratner expects to sell his luxury apartments for once they are built. ‘I think [the state] lowballs to deter people from fighting like we have,’ Mr. Goldstein told me.” Goldstein paid $590,000 for his 1,290-square-foot apartment, or $457 a foot, and the state is now offering him $395 a foot; AY Report writes that state consultants prepared a report saying that prices in Prospect Heights now start at $470 a foot and go up to $1,225 a foot.
The Empire State and Eminent Domain [WSJ]
How New York Abuses Eminent Domain [DDDB]
How the AY Blight Study is About Economic Development [AY Report]
be rude- I did read your post- your problem with Goldstein seems personal. It’s your problem. As for not caring about eminent domain before AY- well, really, did anyone? Did you? It’s a bit much to use that against him- or anyone for that matter. And if he was a “lone crusader” as you put it, do you really think he would have singlehandedly been able to stop AY in its tracks? He has plenty of support and people who agree with him. It’s easy to blame Goldstein for all this but it’s entirely a fictional premise. As I said- your problem seems personal.
And really, if you think everything is peripheral, you are very being disingenuous. As southslope says,you aren’t very well-informed.
be rude — You’re just not particularly well-informed as to the location of the proposed AY development or what’s been going on there over the years. The site is much bigger than the rail yard. It was being developed before Ratner bought up properties and held them without developing them — ie Goldstein’s building, the Newmark building (are million dollar condos a sign of ‘blight’?, and so forth. Ratner stopped the development of the area by insisting on a super-block style approach which has been duly and reasonably opposed by lots of people.
Read my post, bxgrl, I acknowledge that the “neighborhood” is not stritly a rail yard. There is peripheral stuff, but that’s all it is: peripheral. The site is, priniciply, a vacant hole in the middle of a vibrant borough, and the anti-AY crowd needs to stop cloaking it as anything more.
And, bxgrl, this thread is full of “whining over Goldstein” because the article in question is about Goldstein.
While there are some legitimate advocacy groups (are you involved with one?? If so, kudos) that are fighting this on the same grounds they’ve fought many similar battles before, Goldstein’s group isn’t one of them. He is a NIMBY pure and simple. Did he ever care about, or protest against, eminent domain abuse before _his_ house was threatened? I think we all know the answer. My point is merely that he has a narrow focus based on what’s happening to him, but he’s appropriated the image of some righteous crusader for all poor souls, which is disingenuous at best.
I don’t have any problem with folks objecting to “all the minuses of this particular development” — though I happen to disagree with them. I do have a problem with self-satisfied folks feigning some grand purpose when all they really care about is themselves.
be rude- you must not live in the area because the “neighborhood” encompasses much more than the rail yards. And last I hear, it is still a free country. In other words, just because someone waves money in your face, doesn’t mean you have to sell your home.
I am always amused how the pro AY people toss around NIMBY like there was no tomorrow. Forget people who resent the use of eminent domain for the benefit of a private developer, or the taxpayers subsidies to that same developer, or the fact that his project development bears no relationship to the surrounding communities, or even much to reality, but heaven forfend someone should object to all the minuses of this particular development, they must be labelled NIMBY. Or whiners. Yet oddly enough they have proven they can do far more than whine- they took effective legal action. Whereas Pro-AYers are still whining over Goldstein. Priceless.
The neighborhood that Ratner is “running roughshod over” is a desolate rail yard. Yes, there are some other steets/structures on the periphery, but by and large it is a desolate hole. Let’s call a spade a spade: it is a place in need of redevelopment. And most homeowners took the windfall, market-peak buyouts Ratner offered. Hardly a bad deal for them.
Taxpayers may (or may not) be getting a rough deal, but public subsidies for redevelopment and sports facilities are nothing new. We can debate ad nauseum whether public $$ should be involoved with stuff like this, but the fact is there was no “curtain covering up business as usual” that Goldstein’s intrepid group of crack sleuths uncovered and tore down. If you don’t think this is anything but business as usual, I have a bridge I may want to sell you.
Goldstein is just a NIMBY whiner, and one of the things that irks me the most about DDDB and its apologists is how they recoil at any NIMBY association. Just embrace it, Dan, and I’d have less of a problem with you. And if the group is really about righteous indignation with corporate/government tie-ups and improper use of public money — and not merely NIMBY whining — why did you call it DDDB not, say, DDDNYC, or DDDNYS?? I guess DDDB is better than DDD-the-corner-of-Atlantic-and-Flatbush, though. That’d be too obvious.
Sure- I would so much rather have a Ratner running roughshod over taxpayers, neighborhoods and homeowners than a Daniel Goldstein and DDDB who actually had the guts to stand up to him and his steamroller. Yeah. Really. A Brooklyn Basketball team is just so much more important than all of that. (Psssst….wanna buy a bridge?)
Goldstein is getting just desserts.
(1) “Uh”, half off, I think what Goldstein was referring to was the state lowballing folks (like him) who had previously rejected a developer’s initial, generous offer and instead choose to fight.
(2) Right on smeyer, people shouldn’t get their panties all in a bunch right now over the fact that the state has started low … it is a negotiating stance after all.
(3) This is just my personal opinion, but Goldstein and the whole DDDB crew are a bit too self-indulgent for my tastes. I hear what babs is saying, that giving him anything less than fair value sets a bad precedent for the rest of us should the state come looking for our property in the future (although the big caveat from above is that the state will probably pay him fair value and is just starting out from a low point, which is a page out of Negotiation 101), but that notwithstanding part of me would love for him to get smacked down with a lowball price for dragging this charade on for years too long.
The Constitution is a worthless document????? I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…I will not invoke Godwin…