Thursday, June 7, 2007

Atlantic Yards will cost us BIG time

From the NY Post:

More than half of Bruce Ratner's $4 billion Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn will be funded by government subsidies, a blockbuster court disclosure reveals.

The developer expects $1.4 billion in tax-exempt bonds to finance the project's 2,250 units of affordable housing, according to a state document obtained by project opponents through the courts and posted online yesterday.

The city is already kicking in $205 million and the state another $100 million.

The project's Frank Gehry-designed arena would be financed primarily with another $637 million in tax-exempt bonds. At least $2.34 billion of the estimated $3.97 billion - 58.9 percent - of the development costs would be financed by government-backed money.

"It is now starkly clear that Ratner's project . . . would hoard scarce housing subsidy resources from all over New York City," said Daniel Goldstein, spokesman for the opposition group Develop-Don't Destroy Brooklyn.

RATNER'S $2B GOV'T SUBSIDY

In other Atlantic Yards news:

Judge tosses Atlantic Yards challenge

Judge Rejects Main Argument of Effort to Stop Atlantic Yards Project in Brooklyn

Atlantic Yards suit dismissed

In other "suspicious-of-developer" news:

Report: LI Officials Protest Trump's Sweetheart Deal

Photo from DDDB.net

2 comments:

Taxpayer said...

Here's the deal: Ratner gets the use of property owned by citizens for homes or business. He gets additional hundreds of millions from the state and city. He wants more - several billion from all taxpayers in the nation. He will profit from the sale of "affordable" housing. He will profit indefinitely from the use of the arena. He will profit from the team he owns.

I wonder how he explains to taxpayers in Idaho or Arkansas how they benefit from paying into his profits.

Why would a judge decide that the only measure of the value for taking private property is how many dollars are generated?

Is it possible that the judge is computing his commission?

The ruling elevates profits above the value of peaceably raising a family or running a business.

If Ratner's project is so great, why can he not raise private funds only and develop the "valuable" project in the middle of Iowa, or Nebraska?

Perhaps because the elected officials and judges are not as pliable in places such as those.

Anonymous said...

We all know that judges are bought and paid for!

The remaining question is....how much in this case!!!!