Monday, June 1, 2009

SCA is eminent domain happy

From the Queens Chronicle:

For the past nine years Sharif El Fouly has been leasing most of a building he owns in Astoria to the Baccelaureate School for Global Education. Now, the city’s School Construction Authority wants the whole building, located at 34-12 36th Avenue.

The SCA isn’t offering to buy the property though, Fouly said; instead, it seeks to aquire it through a process called “condemnation,” which involves seizing the property without the owner’s consent.

The Department of Education confirmed that the public approval process for acquiring the property has begun, although spokesman William Havemann said the SCA typically tries to negotiate with owners before taking properties without their consent.

Fouly said he wants to keep the property but is more than willing to negotiate lease options. He added that his requests to sit down and talk with the SCA have fallen on deaf ears.

“A month and a half ago, [the SCA] said, ‘That’s the law, and we’re going to exercise it — we’re going to take the building,’” he said. “They never once came to the table.”

The DOE declined to comment on that assertion.


Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight, they are going to toss out a school to build a school. In addition to robbing this man of his rightful property, they are going to displace a building full of students?????

Taxpayer said...

And the Commissar wants to be given totalitarian control over schools in New York City.

Here's a peek into the future: Anytime someone has a question answered, learning has occurred.

Watch this Commissar who wants ownership of all our property, try to define a school as ANY place where any question is answered.

Once some moron leftist, Stalinist judge approves that definition, kiss all your property good-bye.

Keep your property. Use your vote to teach Commissar Moron a lasting lesson on November 3.

Anonymous said...

No, they are going to take the existing building, and keep the school there - just not pay the landlord

Another reason to NEVER do business with the city (or any government agency if you can avoid it)

It's a shame that it's gotten to the point in this country that one of the worst things you can do is pop up on the governments radar - that you have to "fly stealth" if you value your property and rights

linda said...

hey the owner didn't do business with the SCA and they were threating to take it, but then turned around and paid well over the asking price for the HS in maspeth, hmm something under the table. can't stand this guy with the sca and our mayor! we all need to get rid of these weasels come nov. sicking how they all do business.

Taxpayer said...

Excellent observation, Linda!

Over pay for one contaminated site. Theft of the other site.

We have to dump the Commissar so we can look at the books and do some forensic accounting.

November 3 - dump the turd!

Anonymous said...

Back in the USSR, Back in the USSR, the Gulag Archipelago and the First Circle live and they have been transplanted to New York.

Beware, next they will cart the owner away to the nuthouse, as well as trying to grab the property. This tactic was tried on me and two neighbors when we ran afoul of a big Monserrate donor, and only our speed-dialing our lawyers kept us free.

Lino said...

don't feel too bad for this landlord. Typically, city agencies pay well over what the so-called free market would pay -often for substandard and poorly maintained facilities.

Mr Sharif El Fouly has probably gotten his pound of flesh..if that metaphor isn't too obvious for you.

"Property rights" anyone?

Queens Crapper said...

He owns the property. Case closed. Landlords are supposed to make profit on their buildings. "Don't feel too bad for this landlord" is a stupid statement.

Lino said...

"He owns the property. Case closed."

-To -your- way of thinking.

The City's Corporation Counsel obviously sees different.

We'll see about that "stupid statement"....

BTW: You take the statement from an interested party (landlord) that the "The SCA isn’t offering to buy the property" as fact?

Bottom line: Eminent domain is applicable here.

Queens Crapper said...

Whether or not the SCA wants to buy the property is moot, as far as I am concerned. The landlord stated that the SCA isn't offering to lease the property, but rather wants to take it from him. As they have started condemnation procedures, this seems to be true. He wants to keep his building because he has a business on the top floor. I don't see why he needs to be relieved of his property if the SCA saw fit to lease it from him all these years.

Lino said...

"I don't see why he needs to be relieved of his property if the SCA saw fit to lease it from him all these years."

I understand your position.

Real estate prices are down and this is a good time to engage in some hard a taxpayer I am glad to see any movement away from paying rent to house City services. That article only gives us one side of the story, there will be a public meeting on this and that is where both side will have to state their positions.