Boathouse meeting attempts to "clear the air" but instead raises more questions

"Harbor Master" Dewey Thompson speaks at one of the meeting sessions

Last week, 2 meeting sessions were held that were meant to settle the controversy surrounding the North Brooklyn Boat Club's attempt to stealthily move its proposed permanent location from the Greenpoint Manufacturing and Design Center to a yet-to-be built hotel owned by the Argentos.

Unfortunately, the meetings raised more questions than they answered.

Adam Perlmutter, speaking on the behalf of the NBBC, noted that the boat club/"education center" could not be located at the GMDC because the GMDC lacked a Certificate of Occupancy. He really harped on this point. If this is the case then:

Why was a proposal (to be voted upon) filed in the first place for the GMDC location?
Why move to the new location, 51 Ash Street, which does not have a valid C of O?

A land use attorney - incidentally, one behind the Williamsburg-Greenpoint Rezoning of 2005 - knows full well that a new C of O is obtained upon change of use of the building, so it's uncertain what the purpose of this explanation was.

As per Curbed:

Nonprofit City Parks Foundation, which, to put things as simply as possible, is actually responsible for getting the boathouse built, paid one architect until the project's lack of progress rendered that firm unavailable. Then funds were spent hiring a second architect. Madonna Architects received $3,000, and Ed Weinstein Architects received $36,444.13.

City Parks Foundation was charged with determining the feasibility of the projects before, during and after the vote. If an agreement to locate the boathouse at the GMDC was not made prior to the vote, then why was it even on the ballot and put in first place? Quite a few other projects were jettisoned by City Parks Foundation due to lack of feasibility before the vote, but not this one. Why is that?

The club is currently operating out of a temporary location at 51 Ash Street. That site is owned by Broadway Stages, and negotiations are now underway to build the boathouse at that location instead of the Manhattan Avenue one. There are renderings, but due to ongoing negotiations, Thompson said the NBBC cannot share them at this time.

So we're how many years past the vote and we're still negotiating a new location? This seems pretty asinine, especially for a project that came in 3rd place in the voting.

...meanwhile, a revised budget for the 51 Ash Street site has not yet been released.

And why is that? City Parks Foundation was required to report back to the DEC with a revised budget at regular intervals, so this sounds rather lame. The GMDC plan would have been a much larger undertaking, so the new revised cost should be much less - freeing up money for other projects on the list. Is this dilly-dallying fair to the rest of the stakeholders?

As for New York Shitty's assertion that boathouse funds are being used for a "transient hotel," Thompson said that landlord Broadway Stages is working on its own separate commercial plans for the site, but hasn't announced what their function (or functions) will be.

Actually, Gina Argento quite clearly stated to the Daily News that she was building a hotel at that location (and expected to split the cost of construction with the boathouse). Perhaps the NBBC is still in negotiations with the Argentos because it was revealed to Gina that she won't be seeing any of that money?

Now here's where it gets really interesting. From the The Greenpoint Gazette:

Brian Coleman, the CEO of GMDC said his organization was unceremoniously dumped from the process involving the boathouse’s construction.

“How is this project in any way benefitting the community in its new location?” he asked at the meeting. “Why have we yet to receive any formal notice regarding our participation in the project?”

As the process dragged on, the Boat Club temporarily relocated to 51 Ash Street, a property owned by Broadway Stages, which is offering the space rent-free to the Boat Club.

Coleman said he was never informed of the change and that his organization was never formally asked to step away from the project. In addition, he argued that the Ash Street location would not offer as much open space to the project as the location on Manhattan Avenue.

Coleman and other concerned residents argue that the Ash Street property will soon be home to a private club and hotel owned by Broadway Stages and the Boat Club’s presence on the same property will mean that Broadway Stages will pocket part of the funds.

From the Brooklyn Paper:

Coleman wanted too much money for the waterfront plot, which floods, and worried the building lacked the proper permits to house the education programs the paddlers want to conduct, according to club founder and harbor master Dewey Thompson.

See point above about getting a new C of O, and as for asking for too much money, when you advocate for the massive upzoning of your neighborhood, that's generally what happens. GWAPP, sponsors of the boathouse, supported this rezoning.

Original boathouse proposal at GMDC

The proposal that the community actually voted on was one that would provide repair of the large bulkhead at GMDC which would allow public access to the Creek, an esplanade/park on the waterfront, an environmental center/boathouse and educational programs run by the boathouse out of an historical building.

What they will instead be getting is: no public esplanade/park on the waterfront, no repair of the large bulkhead at the GMDC, but repair of a much smaller one at the new location and an environmental center/boathouse IF and WHEN the Argentos build their "transient" hotel. And how funny is it that so-called "environmental groups" are coalescing around the Argentos, considering their unauthorized actions in the waste trade business?

It sounds like a bait-and-switch, with the focal point being a free boathouse for these folks, in return for them providing only a fraction of what was promised. What's worse is when the CPF and DEC come out with statements like the following:

The mariners contended that Greenpoint Manufacturing was only on the forms as a possible landlord, not a partner, and a state spokeswoman agreed, saying at the hearing that the club had the right to look elsewhere for boat-housing when negotiations collapsed.

"They have the right to look for a new location for the boathouse" is basically letting the public know that this is all this vote was ever about. Let me remind you about the conflicts of interest that abound here. Some in attendance stated that it seemed that the NBBC simply wanted a boathouse and didn't care where it was built, so long as they could find someone to pay for it. And all else involved went along happily.

Thompson said he hopes the boathouse will be open by 2016.

And back when the vote was taken, we all expected the boathouse to be open by now... Instead we got this:

Lots of conflicts of interest keeping boathouse plan afloat

I've been pondering the whole Newtown Creek boathouse debacle and wondering why the City Parks Foundation has been pushing so hard for the project and how it leapfrogged over more popular projects as voted on by stakeholders back in 2011. Well, the dots have been connected.

The choice of the City Parks Foundation to oversee the whole community outreach process for the wastewater treatment plant settlement was a joke, since they are part of the Parks Department. They may say, "City Parks Foundation is the only independent, nonprofit organization to offer programs in parks throughout the five boroughs of New York City," however, all of their employees have "parks.nyc.gov" e-mail addresses. The CPF is a 501c3 that allows Parks to accept tax deductible donations. They should not be involved in any decision making or vote collecting process regarding how the settlement money is spent. Why? Because, as the WSJ explains: "the money comes from $10 million in fines levied against the city for failing to meet deadlines in constructing a new treatment plant and in lowering the level of pollutants in the water". The City is overseeing where the fines it paid will be spent? Hello, conflict of interest.

Open Space Alliance of North Brooklyn is a multi-park conservancy authorized by the NYC Dept of Parks. (The OSA Director is also the Parks Department's North Brooklyn administrator - a Parks employee.) OSA's purpose is to raise private money for public parks in northern Brooklyn. But strangely, it’s accepting donations on behalf of this private boat club. OSA even went so far as to apply for funding for the boat club from the Exxon settlement money.

Hello, conflict of interest #2.

The boathouse project went from 3rd on the list to 1st on the list after the vote. Is this because DEC determined that it's what people in the area really wanted, or because "Commodore" Dewey Thompson, the president of the boat club, is a board member of OSA, which is affiliated with the Parks Dept, as well as a board member of GWAPP? (GWAPP applied for the sewage treatment plant money on behalf of the boathouse.) Conflict of interest #3.

Conflict of interest #4? How about the fact that the project submitted to the DEC and to the public is nowhere near the same as the one being pushed now? Don't we deserve to see the plans? (Interestingly, I hear that some of the board members of the groups behind this endeavor have not been allowed access to the plans.) Perhaps there should be a revote? Or was the result of all this "community input" pre-determined, with the necessary steps taken after the vote to ensure that the outcome looked legitimate?

And then there's Newtown Creek Alliance:

NCA Supports a New & Improved Home for the North Brooklyn Boat Club

And here are the reasons why they support it:

1) Access: Along Newtown Creek’s 11 miles of waterfront there are only two safe public access points: DEP’s Nature Walk and the Manhattan Ave. Street End park. The new NBBC facility will provide a third much needed public access point.

2) Eyes on the Creek: Dozens of pollution investigations and enforcement actions against Newtown Creek polluters have been set-in motion as a result of the first-hand observations and vigilance of concerned local residents. Waterfront and water access results in more “Eyes on the Creek”, which will ultimately lead to a safer, less polluted Newtown Creek.

3) Education: There is nothing quite like being on the water itself to inspire curiosity about the multifaceted history of the Creek and wonder at the innumerable life forms that call Newtown Creek home. Over the past two years, NBBC has introduced hundreds of people to Newtown Creek for the first time. A permanent home for NBBC that includes an education center will help build a well informed constituency for the Creek that cares about it’s future.

4) Water Quality: How the public uses a waterway informs how clean the government requires it to be. That is to say, if people are swimming in the water, then that body of water must be cleaner than one that is simply used by ships for navigating from point A to point B. Currently, Newtown Creek is misclassified with the lowest water quality designation, a classification that belies the fact that people boat and fish on Newtown Creek. It is our hope that the growing presence of human powered watercraft on Newtown Creek, enabled by a NBBC that teaches safe boating, will force a reclassification of Newtown Creek’s water quality designation so it reflects its actual use as a recreational waterway.

Hmmm... They forgot to mention reason number 5, as revealed by the NY Times:

There are also discussions to include office space for Riverkeeper and the Newtown Creek Alliance, nonprofit organizations working in the area.(inside the boathouse/hotel)

Ah...Conflict of interest #5.

Pushing "4) Water quality" when the public has been warned to stay the hell off the Superfund site, doesn't seem very responsible to me. But I am not a member of this group. I was asked many years ago to join, but I got a bad vibe from the people trying to recruit me, and I declined. Always trust your tweeding radar, folks.

I really have to wonder how the 2 men who are responsible for creating this monster - then Attorney General and now Governor Andrew Cuomo, and current Attorney General Eric Schneiderman - are allowing this to continue. And Bill DeBlasio, who is anti-conservancy for reasons perfectly illustrated by this situation...how about you? Public Advocate Letitia James? Anyone?

How about Queens elected officials whose constituents were disenfranchised by this process? Van Bramer? Crowley?

Assembly Member Joe Lentol and Council Member Steve Levin: You've been listed as "sponsors" of this boathouse. Are you supportive of the way this process has been carried out? You've been eerily quiet about the whole controversy. Of course, a member of the press would have actually had to ask you about it. Speaking of which... WHERE THE HELL IS THE PRESS? Specifically, the BROOKLYN PRESS?


Meanwhile, Miss Heather has been told that the above rendering is that of the boathouse. A tipster told her that it actually is 10 years old. Amazing that this has been going on for so long. You'd think that they'd be working out of more than just shipping containers by now if they had the community support that they claim to have.

To be continued...

Because $7M for a boat club just isn't enough...

UPDATE: I was just reminded that the boathouse was the #3 vote-getter during the process. The Dutch Kills park was actually #1. So how did the boathouse vault to the top of the list? That needs to be investigated as well.


Besides the $7M from the Newtown Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant settlement, Greenpoint is eligible for $19.5M from the Exxon oil spill settlement:

"The Greenpoint Community Environmental Fund is a $19.5 million grant program launched in 2011 by the NYS Attorney General’s Office and the Department of Environmental Conservation (the State). Funding for the GCEF was obtained by the State in a settlement with ExxonMobil over its Greenpoint oil spill. The overall goal of the GCEF is to secure significant environmental improvements in Greenpoint. More specifically, the GCEF is:

• Designed to support projects that address the community’s environmental priorities, such as improving water quality, groundwater, open space, toxic pollution and air quality.
• Committed to a transparent and objective process, and to engaging and partnering with the Greenpoint community. This includes ensuring the community has a direct, continuing role in guiding the GCEF’s development and implementation.

The State established a Greenpoint Community Advisory Panel (CAP) -- a group of Greenpoint residents, representatives of local organizations and elected officials -- to provide direct, ongoing input to the State on the GCEF. The CAP has played a central role in guiding the Fund's development and implementation, including helping to create the process used for selecting a General Administrator for the GCEF, as well as for soliciting, evaluating, and selecting projects to receive grant funding."

Some members of the advisory panel:

• Christine Holowacz, GWAPP (sponsoring NBBC for Wastewater Treatment Plant money)
  
• Dewey Thompson, North Brooklyn Boat Club
  
• Gina Argento, builder of hotel where boathouse will be located
  
• Kate Zidar, Newtown Creek Alliance (sponsoring NBBC for Wastewater Treatment Plant money)
  
• Katie Denny, Open Space Alliance (sponsoring NBBC for Exxon settlement money)
  
• Michael Heimbinder, Newtown Creek Alliance
  
• Phillip Muesgaas, Riverkeeper (sharing office space with boat club)
  
• Ronald Van Cooten, LaGuardia College (sharing programming with boat club)
  

What's wrong with this picture?  All of these people have a connection to the North Brooklyn Boat Club's boathouse project and they sit on an advisory board which will determine whether or not the project, which appears on the preliminary list 5 times, is worthy of funding. From the list of preliminary projects:

• Green roof on boathouse
• Additional funding for North Brooklyn boat club on Newtown Creek
• Fund purchase of boats for, or building of boats at, boathouse being constructed with Newtown Creek EBP funds at GMDC
• Expand boathouse to create youth employment via boat-building
• Kayaking program for Bushwick Inlet

From July 2013 minutes:

A CAP member asked for clarification on whether the construction of new buildings would be considered an eligible project and the conversation turned to whether it would be helpful to produce a list of ineligible projects? The GA explained at this time it is impossible to say whether a specific proposal would be eligible or ineligible because that decision is based upon review process and screening factors described in the RFP. But the RFP will describe ineligible project types to receive funding from the GCEF. The GA agreed to create a checklist for prospective applications with ineligibility criteria. However, the GA pointed out that a proposal for construction of a new building would have to meet a very high bar to be considered eligible for funding. The building would have to provide multiple environmental benefits, funds could be provided for specific environmental enhancements associated with the building such as solar panels etc., the applicant would have to have site control, and provide a high match.

Interesting how they ask if construction of a new building will be covered, and then the following month, Gina Argento suddenly is added to the board.

From August 2013 conference call:

CAP Recruitment. Filip Stabrowski, NBDC, announced the addition of four new CAP members:
Gina Argento of Broadway Stages
Heidi Shea Springer of Greenpoint Gardens
Joanna Micek an Independent Consultant
Ronald VanCooten of LaGuardia College
This brings the total number of voting CAP members to 15.

(No minutes have been posted since October. The panel has monthly meetings.  There was a deadline of December 2013 for submission of grant proposals, but there has been no update as to which were submitted before the deadline.)

These are large grant pre-proposals:

**** Applicant: Open Space Alliance For North Brooklyn, Inc
Title: Greenpoint Marine Environmental Center (GMEC) (#42888)
Description: This project proposes a fully developed marine environmental education center near the mouth of Newtown Creek, to connect residents with the plethora of issues and conditions present in our local waterbodies. The center will be part of the 10,000 square foot Greenpoint Boathouse and Environmental Education Center. Location: 437 McGuinness Blvd. at Ash Street.
Grant Request: $135,000
Matching Funds: $112,500
Contact Information: Kurt Cavanaugh, gcef@osanb.org, (347) 842-7915

**** Applicant: Open Space Alliance For North Brooklyn, Inc
Title: Environmental Education Shed (ED Shed) (#42742)
Description: The ED Shed is a hands-on environmental educational and research outpost dedicated to establishing and elevating the connection between Greenpoint residents and their surrounding marine environs.
Location: The North Brooklyn Boat Club (NBBC) - 437 McGuinness Blvd. at Ash Street, Greenpoint. The Ed Shed is located 100 feet from the Newtown Creek shore and the North Brooklyn Boat Club floating dock.
Grant Request: $24,426 Matching Funds: $3,600
Contact Information: Kurt Cavanaugh, gcef@osanb.org, (347) 842-7915

**** Applicant: Open Space Alliance For North Brooklyn, Inc
Title: Floating Classrooms on Greenpoint's Waterways (#42037)
Description: The North Brooklyn Boat Club will expand environmental education on Greenpoint’s waterways through the purchase and deployment of two large canoes and the development of an educational curriculum.
Location: Greenpoint Grant Request: $24,693
Matching Funds: $25,000 Contact Information: Kurt Cavanaugh, gcef@osanb.org, (347) 842-7915

And all this conflict of interest was found on a website operated by 

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and the NYSDEC.

Miss Heather has more on the phoniness of the organizations involved in this whole thing. It's definitely worth a read to those who are opposed to tweeding, which this is in its most blatant form.

It's time to BRING IN THE FEDS.

The Greenpoint boathouse scandal: The truth finally comes out

From Curbed:

Dewey Thompson of the North Brooklyn Boat Club reached out to confirm a few details.

According to Thompson, the North Brooklyn Boat Club will likely be the occupant of the community space in the new building that's planned for 51 Ash Street. Broadway Stages has let the boat club operate on the site rent-free for several years now, and they are currently in talks to give the club a permanent home in this new structure. Thompson said no lease has yet been signed, but it's looking very likely. The new boathouse would have 8,000-square-feet of space on the ground floor for an education center, boat storage, and public access to the water.

Thompson also said that the plan for locating the boathouse in the Greenpoint Manufacturing and Design Center down the block fell through because they could not work out an agreement. They hope to finalize plans with Broadway Stages in the coming weeks. As for the "transient hotel" part of the new building, it seems like it will be lodging for production staff working with Broadway Stages (not a traditional hotel).

Well that certainly sounds like a load of crap. In other words, this is actually planned to be an apartment building, further gutting the Manufacturing/Industrial Business Zone, and to top it all off, next to a Superfund site. Who is going to make sure the occupants are transients? No one.

From the Daily News:

“It’s beyond sketchy,” Geoffrey Croft, executive director of NYC Park Advocates, said of the plan to use public funds to help build a for-profit enterprise, which was selected in 2011 and recently turned up on two local blogs, Curbed and Queens Crap. “No money from the city should go for a private hotel.”

“There’s absolutely no conflict of interest,” said Dewey Thompson, co-president of the North Brooklyn Boat Club. The club runs the boathouse at the mouth of the creek, near the East River.

“The grant money is going specifically and only to building the community boathouse facility within the commercial structure,” he said.

State Department of Environmental Conservation officials also said the money will be used for the boathouse, not for the hotel, and said the City Parks Foundation requested an extension for the project completion deadline, which was to expire on Feb. 18.

But Broadway Stages president Gina Argento told a different story, saying she plans to split the cost of the entire project, which will include about half a dozen hotel rooms, down the middle with the boathouse.

“Nothing is final yet,” said Argento, who has also been identified as an investor in the controversial Knockdown Center event space in Maspeth.

The City Parks Foundation would not comment. The city and state Health Departments and city Department of Environmental Protection did not return calls and emails.

Ah, so there we have it. Gina plans to use taxpayer money to build her fake hotel and has no problem saying so. Once again, this is someone found to be lacking good character, honesty and integrity, so there's no surprise here. The DOB filing says there will be 11 units in this building. She says "1/2 a dozen".

And embarrassingly, the City Parks Foundation will bend over backwards to help her build her hotel, going so far as to request an extension. This boat club hasn't been able to get its act together after several years, folks. They don't even have a lease or agreement for the new space at this point, and as Gina says, "Nothing is final yet." Take them off the list and redistribute the money to the other projects on both sides of the Creek that are ready to go.

Otherwise, it appears to be time to BRING IN THE FEDS.

Something reeks at Newtown Creek (and it isn't the water)!

Miss Heather has posted some eye-opening screenshots that seem to indicate that the Argentos of Knockdown Center fame have pulled another fast one on communities on both sides of Newtown Creek. How did they accomplish this? Let’s take a trip back in time to 2010…

Back then, it was announced that the City Parks Foundation was looking for participants to attend meetings to help determine how the Newtown Creek Environmental Benefit Project Funds were to be distributed. People from both sides of the Creek were invited to share their wishes, and ultimately a vote was taken to determine the top finalists.

Here is the list that was published after the vote tally:

The list was vetted by DEC and the NY Attorney General's office, and the final result was this:

You’ll note that a boathouse was the number one vote-getter. It wasn't. It actually came in third, but for some reason, it was given priority over the other projects ahead of it. It’s also controversial because the Dept of Health actually doesn’t want people paddling around Newtown Creek for health reasons, but the Parks Dept & City Planning convinced them to keep it on the list.

Christine Holowacz and "Commodore" Dewey Thompson.
Photo by Stefano Giovannini from the Brooklyn Paper.

Christine Holowacz is often referred to as a Greenpoint “community activist”. She and "Commodore" Dewey Thompson (that's what he prefers to be called) are allied with GWAPP, which is the group that pushed for the boathouse with a massive get-out-the-vote drive, including relentless blast e-mails. GWAPP members are also members of various other astroturf groups that were created to make it appear that the whole area wants a boathouse.

GWAPP seems to be under the impression that the entire $7M in Creek funds is theirs:

On October 25, 2011, the DEC and CPF submitted a letter [PDF (3.5MB)] approving the funds of the EBP to building out the boathouse, promising up to $7 million for the project. Runner-up projects would receive any leftover funding that was not used in the creation of the boathouse, however those project cannot receive funding until the principal project, the boathouse, is completed.

Unless there were some closed door shenanigans that we are not aware of, that is not the case. They were approved for $3M as noted in the screenshot above.

The address of the boathouse, as per the Newtown Creek website started December 2013, is now 437 McGuinness Blvd, aka 51 Ash Street. The website also says, "Holowacz and Thompson are currently working to finalize a location to house the boathouse and environmental education center."

Finalize a location? Why is that? The project was approved for 1155 Manhattan Avenue, the site of the Greenpoint Manufacturing and Design Center. These are very specific, detailed plans, incorporating the architecture and history of the previously proposed site. How can they just pick up and move to a not-yet-built site? And how is DEC ok with this?

So, what do you get when you pull up the DOB filing for 51 Ash Street? An application to build a 4-story hotel, with a “private club” listed as the "community facility" that allows the owner to build larger than what is normally allowed. The owner? None other than Broadway Stages, co-owned by Gina and Tony Argento! If the "private club" is temporary, then how do they calculate an augmented FAR based on its inclusion?  Could it be the new permanent home of the North Brooklyn Boat Club?

Is the "Greenpoint Waterfront Association for Parks and Planning" actually pushing for a private boathouse? How do so-called environmentalists sleep at night knowing they have sold out their community to people who "lack good character, honesty and integrity" in exchange for a boathouse? The club currently charges $40 for membership per year. How can public funds be released to build a boathouse that is only open to members? Who the hell in Greenpoint, outside of these charlatans, wants to see a boathouse built with environmental settlement money inside a hotel right next to the Pulaski Bridge?

Bottom line: GWAPP is getting the money for their private club, the Argentos are getting an FAR increase to build a bigger hotel, and everyone benefits except the rest of the neighborhood.

AND NOW LET’S GET TO QUEENS.
From City Parks Foundation:

The Dutch Kills Basin Park Project proposed to construct a park with athletic fields and waterfront access. The proposed park location is along 47th Avenue between 27th and 29th Streets, in the area adjoining the Dutch Kills basin. Long Island City Roots is serving as the primary community representative for the proposed project. City Parks Foundation partnered with The Trust for Public Land (TPL) in evaluating the proposed park location. TPL submitted a letter of inquiry to the property owners of the parcels required to construct the park in the proposed location. The property owners did not respond to TPL’s letter. While awaiting response from the property owners, City Parks Foundation contracted with Goodman-Marks Associates to perform an appraisal of the proposed park location. The appraised value of the property greatly exceeded the proposed project budget. Given this information, DEC determined that the initial project location is infeasible. CPF is currently working with Long Island City community groups in an attempt to find an alternate location.

The decision posted in the second photo above states,

“If after all the projects in the primary group are implemented or projects have been determined to be infeasible to implement and additional mitigation funds remain uncommitted, the State will propose a prioritized list of projects for implementation from the secondary group.”

The language is quite clear. If a project isn’t going to happen, then it’s removed from the list and the DEC draws from the second group. It doesn't say that they'll sit and wait for the people behind a project to scramble to find an alternate location. Yet that is exactly what is happening with the Greenpoint Boathouse and the Dutch Kills Basin Park Project.

Wouldn’t it have been smarter to fund them in the order that they were ready to go? For example, planting trees could have been first and would already be making an impact. If the St. Saviour’s ULURP had been funded back in 2011, there might have been a park at that site instead of warehouses. The DEC knocked that relatively inexpensive item off the list completely, yet kept the construction of the park on, which expedited the death of the project.

The Pulaski Bridge Study was ready to go.
Renovation of McCarren Park would be finished by now.
The Greenpoint Monitor Museum was ready to go as well. (Oooooh, but that would have held back the development of the greenway along the coast! We can’t have that. The site of the Monitor Museum has been proposed for public restrooms. Which means the city will eventually own it. Which means eminent domain.)

Instead everyone now must sit by and wait for a hotel to be built next to the Pulaski Bridge. Because the actual polluting of the Creek wasn't enough punishment.

More to come! Stay tuned!