State wants to develop more of Creedmoor property

From the Queens Chronicle:

Members of Community Board 13 have learned to take more than a passing interest when a state agency comes to them talking about development plans for surplus land at the Creedmoor Psychiatric Center in Bellerose.

Richard Hellenbrecht, the board’s land use chairman, said the Empire State Development Corp. has approached them with plans for two parcels on the south campus totaling 53 acres.

The south campus is bordered by Hillside Avenue to the south, Winchester Boulevard to the west, Union Turnpike to the north and mostly residential housing to the east.

The towering main hospital is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Winchester Boulevard and Union Turnpike.

Speaking at the board’s monthly meeting on Nov. 21, Hellenbrecht said housing is the primary aim, with 1,278 dwelling units included in the proposal.

“There would be apartments and one- and two-family houses,” Hellenbrecht told the group. Twenty percent of the dwellings would be classified as affordable. There would be 370 one- and two-family homes.

But the ESDC also is proposing apartment buildings of four and five stories, which CB 13 has considered out of character with the existing homes in the adjacent neighborhood to the east. It would require zoning changes that would allow builders to exceed the 35-foot height limit.

“We’re not too happy about that,” he said.

And while a new public school building is part of the requested package, so are only 1,294 new parking spaces to accommodate the new 1,278 units.

The ESDC also is proposing to put a youth center in or on the site of the old Creedmoor power generating station.

Tool created by city to help develop the waterfront

From Crains:

Applicants for construction permits on waterfront property can end up waist-deep in bureaucracy, but a new website will help them navigate.

The Waterfront Navigator website, funded by the Empire State Development Corp. and the city, aims to be a one-stop shop for users to figure out which permits they need from which agencies, and how to get them.

The city, state and federal government all have jurisdiction over the coastline and local landowners sometimes need sign-off on environmental compliance from all three levels of government before beginning normal city buildings permit processes.

"New York City has long been a global maritime hub for waterfront business owners and development, yet it has been a perennial challenge to navigate the complicated waterfront permit application process," said Maria Torres-Springer, president of the city's Economic Development Corp., in a statement. "This is largely because of the multiple layers of federal, state, and local entities with jurisdictional responsibility for waterfront construction permitting.”

More development. Less public access. NOW.

Judge Rules Plaintiffs in Atlantic Yards Legal Case Entitled to Fees; Forest City Ratner Must Pay

Developer, State Must Compensate Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn,
Other Community Groups
NEW YORK, NY — A judge today ruled that the Empire State Development Corporation ("ESDC") is liable for legal fees incurred by community groups that sued successfully to compel a supplemental environmental impact study (SEIS) for the second phase of Forest City's controversial Atlantic Yards project. She referred the parties to a referee to determine the amount of the award, which under an agreement with ESDC, Forest City Ratner will then have to pay.

The ruling was issued by New York State Supreme Court Justice Marcy S. Friedman, who in July of 2011 held that the second phase of the Atlantic Yards project must undergo re-analysis because of significant changes in the originally claimed 10-year construction timeline. Justice Friedman noted that this review "should lead to ‘consideration of alternatives [to the currently proposed project] that may more effectively meet the ostensible goal of the project to alleviate blight and create affordable and market-rate housing with less adverse environmental impacts.'" ESDC and Forest City Ratner lost their appeal of Justice Friedman's ruling at the Appellate Division, and the Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, refused to hear the case. The ESDC, the quasi-governmental entity overseeing the project, has yet to issue the draft SEIS required by the courts.

In reaching her decision that the plaintiffs were entitled to their attorneys fees as the prevailing party, Justice Friedman expressly denounced ESDC's claim that it was justified in continuing to use a ten year timeline when its own Development Agreement with Forest City Ratner reflected a buildout of up to 30 years, calling the claim "no small audacity, in light of the court's prior findings . . [including] the ESDC's ‘deplorable lack of transparency.'"

"Justice Friedman's ruling today is another reminder of the sordid 10-year history of the Atlantic Yards project, which to this day has largely failed to deliver on the promises that were used to sell it to the people of New York," said Candace Carponter, Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn's legal director. "We're gratified by today's decision, but the fact remains that, as Justice Friedman suggests, had the ESDC and Forest City Ratner not knowingly misrepresented the facts to the court, the entire Atlantic Yards project, including the heavily subsidized Barclays Center, would never have gotten off the drawing board."

"Justice Friedman has rendered a strong decision that vindicates what the community has been saying for a long time. One can only wonder whether this project would have ever moved forward if, as Justice Friedman noted, ESDC had disclosed the project's true timeline", said Jeffrey S. Baker, lead attorney for Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn and a partner in Young, Sommer LLC. "It is time for ESDC to finally engage in an open and honest process that considers the full range of alternatives for Phase II of this project, not just the interests of Forest City Ratner."

Cuomo involved in the patronage he vowed to stop; Ghost of Donald Manes haunts CD19 race

From the NY Times:

New York State’s economic development agency created a new position last June, and then found a candidate to fill it: a young man named Willard Younger, who had just graduated from Colgate University with a degree in classics and religion. He became a special projects associate, at a salary of $45,000 a year, according to state personnel records.

His father, Stephen P. Younger, is a lawyer and power broker in legal circles who was a member of one of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s transition teams. He has also donated $26,000 to Mr. Cuomo’s campaigns over the years, disclosure records show.

The next month, the agency hired 23-year-old Andrew Moelis, a University of Pennsylvania graduate, for another new position, strategic planning associate, at a salary of $75,000 a year.

Shortly before Mr. Moelis’s first day of work, his father, Ron Moelis, a prominent real estate developer, gave $25,000 to Mr. Cuomo’s re-election campaign, according to the records.

Since taking office in 2011, Mr. Cuomo has repeatedly pledged to bring a new approach to Albany, where politicians of both major parties have long rewarded supporters with jobs that are not open to the general public.

But an investigation by The New York Times into hiring by the agency, the Empire State Development Corporation, shows how Mr. Cuomo’s administration has engaged in some of the same patronage practices that have often prevailed here.

The investigation was based on personnel records obtained through a Freedom of Information request, as well as campaign finance and other state records. Numerous interviews were conducted with state officials, employees and outside experts.



Well, now we know how Austin Shafran got his job there. The Shafrans have been hooked up since the days of Donald Manes. In fact, Austin's campaign contribution list reads like Donald Manes' rolodex.  Here are some of the contributors:

• Lester Shafran (and wife Beth) - Uncle, ex-head of the PVB, found guilty in the scandal.
• Sid Davidoff & Stephen Malito - Davidoff was Manes' best friend and lawyer, pushed for the Grand Prix raceway and represented the USTA for their expansion in 1993. Davidoff and Malito are political fixers, bar none.
• Then we have Sean Crowley working for Davidoff.  Another lobbyist involved in some not-too-civic friendly projects from another family that thrives only on nepotism.
• Michael Nussbaum - Manes' bagman in a bribery scandal - $250,000 to get a cable television franchise - who had his conviction reversed and now is in sole control of the Queens Tribune.

Here's a summary of where some of Shafran's current contributions come from (total = $58,802):
Political / Elected Officials /Candidates /Government $9,890
Donald Manes Associates and Intermediaries $4,200
Lobbyists (they show up on the NYC Lobbyist search) $1,500
Unions $8,450
Real Estate / Developers / Construction $4,275
Lawyers $1,675
Employees of:
Epoch Times $1,850
Union Plaza Nursing Home $1,350
Parker Jewish Institute $800

This constitutes 58% of Shafran's contributions.

Do you folks in eastern Queens want to return to the days of Donald Manes?

Fresh Direct deal under fire

From the Daily News:

Two months after the Bloomberg administration approved $82 million in subsidies for the company to move to the South Bronx, two City Council members have asked the Cuomo administration to halt the deal.

Melissa Mark-Viverito and Maria del Carmen Arroyo want Albany to delay the move pending an audit of the Harlem River Rail Yards, the state-owned, privately-controlled waterfront site where FreshDirect plans to build its new headquarters.

"We need greater transparency," Mark-Viverito said Tuesday.

The city, state and the Bronx have already committed about $120 million to the online grocer, with some caveats, but the Cuomo-controlled Empire State Development Corp. has yet to approve an additional $9 million. It expects to vote on the grant this summer.

"We are concerned that this property has been and continues to be used in a manner that is causing severe harm to the residents of the South Bronx and that undermines nearly two decades of rezoning and development," the councilwomen wrote in a May 3 letter to Joan McDonald, state Department of Transportation commissioner.

When Harlem River Yard Ventures leased the site from the state DOT in 1991, the company vowed to develop a new rail system that would reduce local truck traffic.

But Mark-Viverito and Arroyo claim it has done the opposite, inking subleases with heavy truck users such as FedEx, the New York Post and now FreshDirect.

Vito charity gets lots of state cash

From the Daily News:

The Assemblyman Lopez-founded Ridgewood-Bushwick Senior Citizens Council -- which has been the subject of several recent investigations -- received three grants totaling $845,806 to build or renovate housing in Brooklyn, according to documents released by the administration today.

“There was a search for projects that if funded right now could create jobs very quickly - that really had built in infrastructure and support,” said Kenneth Adams, president and CEO of the Empire State Economic Development Corporation.

New York City received only $66.2 million for a total of 50 projects, which ranked fourth from the bottom among the 10 regions awarded funds at Thursday morning's lavish ceremony.

Adams and other administration officials defended the awards, saying they were chosen based on merit by a “Strategic Plan Review Committee.” The Committee scored presentations made by each of the Regional Economic Development Committees.

“The goal was to identify the best projects, not spend $1 billion,” Adams said.

Ulrich says no thanks, Shafran moves to ESDC

From the Daily News:

Scratch one more name off the list of those possibly interested in replacing disgraced former Rep. Anthony Weiner in NY-9: Queens City Councilman Eric Ulrich tells NY1’s Errol Louis he will not run in the September 13 special election.



From the Daily News:

Austin Shafran, man of a million phone calls, is jumping from his berth as the pitbull spokesman for the state Senate Democratic conference to Vice President of Public Affairs and top mouthpiece for Empire State Development, Commissioner Kenneth Adams announced.

Parks in wealthier nabes get more cops

From AM-NY:

When the first section of Brooklyn Bridge Park opens next month, it will have nine full-time Parks Enforcement Police patrol officers for 13 acres, about as many as the entire borough of the Bronx.

Advocates say that’s a glaring example of a two-tiered system in which wealthier areas get more protection.

The officers – city workers paid with funds raised from nearby property owners - will work in three shifts to provide 24-hour coverage, a level of security other parks don’t get.

A handful of parks – all of which are in Manhattan except for Brooklyn Bridge – have dedicated, full-time patrol officers, paid for by donors or property owners. All other parks share roaming patrols, paid for by the city

Geoffrey Croft, head of New York City Park Advocates, said there is an “enormous disparity between the publicly funded parks and the ones which receive private funding.”

Brooklyn has 15 dedicated city-funded patrol officers covering the rest of its 4,300 acres of parks. In Queens, 14 patrol officers handle more than 7,000 acres and in the Bronx, there are 10 for about 7,000 acres, according to the Park Advocates.

“This is a civil rights issue,” Croft said. “All communities deserve safe, well maintained parks, not just those in wealthy neighborhoods.”

A spokeswoman for the Empire State Development Corp., which until recently shared responsibility for building the park with the city, said the security arrangement reflects the park’s “special need with respect to its isolated location on the waterfront.”

Highland Park is isolated, too, numbnuts. Where are the park cops for there?

Ratner & state bullying family

From Atlantic Yards Report:

Things are getting truly strange for Daniel Goldstein, spokesman for Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, who with his wife and child is the only resident left on Pacific Street between Fifth and Sixth avenues.

Goldstein lost his condo to condemnation last week and his street and two others were closed and made private.

Now that his street is closed to traffic--permanently at Fifth Avenue, and via guarded barriers at Sixth Avenue, anyone visiting Goldstein must provide advance notice, which means friends have been stopped by guards and kept him on the phone today with representatives of both Forest City Ratner and the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), which owns his property.

Goldstein on March 4 received a letter from Charles Webb, ESDC Condemnation Counsel, informing him that "ESDC requires you to relocate by April 3, 2010 (thirty days after the date of this letter) so that development plans for the Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project... may proceed."

Goldstein's attorney Michael Rikon responded forcefully, on behalf of Goldstein and other footprint property owners, calling Webb's letter "an attempt to intimidate our clients":

First, you have absolutely no right to inform anyone that they must vacate by April 3, 2010. You must understand that condemnees have the protection of New York's Eminent Domain Procedure Law. You cannot even suggest a vacate date until you comply with the requirements of the law.

Those requirements include a notice of acquisition and a good faith advance payment. Then the date to vacate would be set by the condemnation court.

He added that "no roadway or access to a street or highway may be interfered with."

What the hell country do we live in? I seriously am starting to wonder.

We're getting soaked by Ratner

From the Huffington Post:

This whole Atlantic Yards boondoggle thing is still getting more amazing. Turns out, when Ratner bullied people into selling out by using the threat of eminent domain--totally standard and understandable--he also knew he could pay top dollar because he was using our own money to help ease his pain. My pain is formidable.

Just yesterday the ESDC, the state agency nominally running the show on behalf of private developer Forest City Ratner, finally allowed reporters to scan the "master closing documents" signed in private two days before Christmas, over a month ago.

Intrepid journalist Norman Oder describes his findings (the only other journalist there was Daily News reporter Erin Durkin). As usual, he does a thorough, detailed, and helpful job. Oder:

"Among the voluminous documents that were part of the Atlantic Yards master closing, first made available today, is one that confirms that, despite previous reports, New York City gave Forest City Ratner $31 million for arena land purchases on top of the $100 million it originally provided.

In other words, $131 million of Forest City Ratner's land purchases in the AY arena footprint, made under the threat of eminent domain, came from public funds.

And even if that represents a reallocation of city subsidies, rather than an additional subsidy--the evidence is murky--it opens up the possibility for additional city infrastructure subsidies at some point."

He also found that there are no low-income units in the plan.

When blight ain't right

From the NY Observer:

State Senator Bill Perkins is apparently not happy about the state's choice of consultants.

One consultant, specifically: AKRF, the New York–based firm that has established itself as the unchallenged king of environmental review in the city and state, dominating the field of government contracts.

The source of angst for Mr. Perkins is Columbia University's proposed 17-acre expansion into West Harlem and the state development agency's selection of AKRF to do a blight study. The blight study is a necessary step for eminent domain in the project, though the state's selection of AKRF has taken significant heat from the courts, which recently dealt the school a tremendous blow by blocking the use of eminent domain for the expansion. Among other factors, the use of AKRF was cited as a concern given that Columbia also used the firm to do its environmental review (the state intends to appeal the ruling).

A sampling of the testimony:

Mr. Perkins [on AKRF]: Have they ever come back with a determination that was, from your point of view, not blighted?

Anita Laremont, Empire State Development Corporation counsel: No.

Mr. Perkins: Have they ever given you a determination that you could prove was not blighted?

Ms. Laremont: No.

Mr. Perkins: So from your point of view, they're 100 percent blight?

ESDC gave $1.62M in taxpayer money to shady kosher slaughterhouse

From the Huffington Post:

I won't get into the details of the conditions at New Square Meats; if you're reading this, odds are you likely have a sense of what they might have involved. One of the basic, primary laws of Kashrut implies cleanliness: there is no eating of bottom-feeders, no partaking of animals that chew their cud and don't have cloven hoofs, no noshing on beasts that wallow in mud baths. Animals under the laws of Kashrut also may not be slaughtered if they are unconscious; among the supposed health benefits of this practice (like it or hate it) is the elimination of potentially sick and/or infectious animals from getting into the food supply. Theoretically.

So how could New Square Meats, which is itself affiliated with the Skver Hasidim--a sect that has repeatedly run afoul of the law--so obviously flout not only the religious dietary laws that they are supposed to be adhering to, but government regulations as well?

First, take religion completely out of the equation (since they've already blown a big fat Bronx cheer in the face of kashrut).

The answer?
Logrolling.

New Square Meats recently received a $1.62 million grant from New York's Empire State Development Corporation to help subsidize the cost of building a new, larger slaughterhouse near the one that has just been shut down; they received the money without obtaining the approvals from local town and county planning departments:

As the Forward reported recently, the slaughterhouse, New Square Meats, was already under fire for its attempt to build a bigger plant, five times the size of its current one, close to New Square's border with the town of New Hempstead. The proposed 26,250 square foot slaughterhouse would cost $3 million. Some local officials were particularly upset by the fact that New Square Meats had received a $1.62 million grant from New York's Empire State Development Corporation to help subsidize the new building without getting approval first from the county- or town-planning departments.

What is clear is that where New Square is concerned, the government--at least at the state level--has simply looked the other way for almost an entire decade; the New Square slaughterhouse that was just shut down had been selling uninspected birds since 2002.

Another public authority. Another horrible waste of taxpayer money.

WE NEED THE FEDS!

Paterson flip flops on eminent domain abuse

How things have changed. A little more four years ago, state Senator David Paterson and Council Member Bill Perkins were of the same mind on eminent domain, especially concerned about Columbia University's planned expansion in West Harlem, an area in their districts.

They called for a moratorium on the use of eminent domain in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial 5-4 Kelo vs. New London decision upholding eminent domain for economic development.

Now Perkins is in the state Senate, the leader of a somewhat lonely legislative effort to reform the state's eminent domain laws, much criticized by not only the libertarian Institute for Justice but also civil rights lawyers like the diehard liberal Norman Siegel. (Perkins has a letter in today's Times asserting that the state's "attempted taking of private property on behalf of Columbia University illustrates how the current process lacks accountability, transparency or meaningful public participation.")

Now Paterson is governor, with a much larger constituency and having inherited some projects--like Atlantic Yards and Columbia--that depend on eminent domain.

And, in separate appearances Saturday just a few blocks (and a few hours) away, Perkins highlighted the need for change, and Paterson stood his ground.

The New York Observer's Jimmy Vielkind asked Paterson about the Columbia case, noting that the ESDC was charged with using eminent domain improperly; should the state appeal and was the process sound?



"We thought that the process was in compliance with land use principles and did not violate eminent domain," Paterson responded. "When I was a state senator in 2005 and I saw the original plan for Columbia, I was virulently opposed to it. But we felt that ESDC and Columbia University had adjusted that plan to be in compliance with the law."

Atlantic Yards headscratcher

From Atlantic Yards Report:

A master closing involving the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), and developer Forest City Ratner is expected to be held [today].

But the ESDC tells me that the documents won't be made publicly available until a week or two after the closing.

That's backwards, isn't it?

In a June 2008 court hearing, an ESDC lawyer said that Forest City Ratner is required to use “commercially reasonable efforts” to move forward.

Similarly, in the pending litigation challenging the ESDC's September approval of the 2009 MGPP, the ESDC states (right; click to enlarge) that a Development Agreement, still under negotiation, would not permit Forest City to construct the project without including the required affordable housing.

But the affordable housing is dependent on subsidies, so shouldn't the public and elected officials see what the Development Agreement says about that obligation, and shouldn't we see that before it's signed?

Or how about this (also from AY Report)?

I spoke yesterday with Perkins, who said he’d spoken with Peter Kiernan, Paterson's Counsel, on Monday.

“I asked him, as per our prior conversation on Friday, what he came up with," Perkins recalled. "And he said 'We’re satisfied with what we got from ESDC and others.' I said, 'Well, what does that mean?' He said, "It’s a creation of JDA.' So I said, 'OK, Is that a subsidiary?' He says, 'No, it’s a creation.' I say, 'What does that mean? Because that sounds like a new word in the context of the conversation… because you said at first it was a subsidiary.'"

That means, Perkins said, that the governor's office believes that the BALDC is not subject to the PACB, which includes scrutiny by the state Comptroller's office and a unanimous vote by the governor, Assembly Speaker, and Senate Majority Leader.

And that's a "violation of the spirit of the [public authority] reforms that we just signed into law," Perkins said. "And obviously it is not the way in which the people expect us to do business."

"[Kiernan] said, well, that’s his answer, that’s what he got," Perkins recalled.

"I found to be unacceptable, because, as I said, it seems to have been a creation to avoid the opportunity to scrutinize the financing," Perkins said. "Usually, you don’t hide unless you have something to hide. Why are we being so exotic about the financing? It’s not being subject to the kind of scrutiny that the legislation that we just passed was intended to provide."

..."We're not anti-development, we just want it to be in accordance with the values of the democracy we're in. Clearly, they are raising the suspicions, not us."

Atlantic Yards project deemed unnecessary... in 1985

There's a historical pattern in this state of the government going after private property multiple times using the threat of eminent domain, until it's finally developed by one of their preferred parties. And each and every time, there are developers salivating over the prospect of being handed cheap land without having to go through the time, cost and effort of acquiring it themselves. Take the Atlantic Yards project, for example which actually was resurrected in order to enrich then-Governor Pataki's college roommate, Bruce Ratner.
The Urban Development Corporation, now known as the Empire State Development Corporation, was looking to site a sports arena in or near NYC way back in 1985. Sites evaluated included Atlantic Terminal, Flushing Meadows (including Willets Point), Coney Island, Midtown near Madison Square Garden, Sunnyside Yards, Yonkers Raceway and Co-Op City.
Atlantic Terminal was eventually ruled out because it would compete with existing venues.
So we're wondering why there has been a new need identified for that location when there are more large venues available now than in 1985.
The proposed project also has a much smaller footprint now, calling into question whether or not it will pay off. Although I suppose that doesn't really matter to Ratner since we taxpayers will be left footing the bill whether it fails or not.

Court forces ESDC to turn over secret documents

From the NY Observer:

The New York Court of Appeals on Tuesday unanimously ruled that the state's economic development agency, which administers eminent domain, must turn a set of records over that Mr. Sprayregen had requested through the Freedom of Information Law. The agency, the Empire State Development Corporation, had provided numerous documents but withheld a set related to a 2004 agreement between the agency and Columbia. Mr. Sprayregen appealed the agency's denial of his FOIL request, and was denied again. He then sued in state Supreme Court and won, though ESDC did not provide all the documents, preferring to appeal. He won again at the appellate level; ESDC appealed again; and now the agency has exhausted its appeals.

The ruling of the court Tuesday found that the agency was overly broad in denying Mr. Sprayregen's FOIL request, and then changed its reasoning for not providing the documents, with the court saying and its "initial determination was superficial, at best."

From Perkins to Paterson

Original letter here.

Dear Governor Paterson:

I write with a great sense of urgency in respectfully calling upon you to forego an appeal of last week’s decision in Kaur v. New York State Urban Development Corporation, and to order a statewide moratorium on the use of eminent domain within the State of New York pending legislative action.

As you are aware, last week’s court decision struck down as unconstitutional the taking of property by the Urban Development Corporation d/b/a“ESDC” for the benefit of Columbia University. The court found ESDC violated both state and federal due process clauses in an effort to prevent affected property owners from obtaining information, and that ESDC’s finding of blight was “bereft of facts which established the neighborhood in question was blighted.” Furthermore, ESDC’s determination that the project even has a public use, benefit or civic purpose is wholly unsupported by the record. The court also noted the glaring conflict of interest, which reeks of bad faith, that existed as a result of ESDC and Columbia using the exact same consultant to review the project and determine blight.

You may recall that back in 2005 you and I stood on the steps of City Hall together with several members of the City Council to protest the United States Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London which affirmed the use of eminent domain for private development that entails a so-called “public use.” That decision contained language encouraging states to review their own eminent domain statutes. Some states have done just that. It is now New York’s turn.

At the time of the Kelo decision, as a State Senator and Minority Leader you understood that the current process is flawed and called for a blanket moratorium on the use of eminent domain. The same reasons for instituting a moratorium back then still exist. In fact they are even more urgent given the Kaur decision, and the recent decision by the Court of Appeals affirming the taking in the case involving Atlantic Yards. It is my understanding you recently and publicly committed to a full objective review of that project and its financing.

As Chair of the Senate’s Corporations, Authorities and Commissions Committee, I held hearings involving the topic of eminent domain. I have gone on record on numerous occasions against what I perceive to be the abuse of eminent domain in this state, particularly as it relates to private development projects. I have often described that abuse as a “mugging”, and one equal to “placing a gun to the community’s head”.

The Columbia decision has intolerably heightened the confusion and uncertainty over what, if anything, constrains the ESDC from taking anyone’s property whenever it suits its fancy. For one, no one knows what “blight” is—the crucial and fundamental issue in both the Columbia and Atlantic Yards cases. What is clear, however, are the signals that the ESDC was not acting in good faith. This I would suggest, is evidenced by the court’s statement that “the record before ESDC contains no evidence whatsoever that Manhattanville was blighted prior to Columbia gaining control over the vast majority of property therein.” The opinion also makes a strong case that the blight determination in that case was severely flawed, and in large part the product of the ESDC’s desire to transfer property to a “private elite education institution”. As a result, I am left with my own opinion, and that of others in my community, that these type of actions on the part of the ESDC are part of an insidious form of discrimination and civil rights violations that must not stand. As the Kaur decision reads, “‘few policies have done more to destroy community and opportunity for minorities than eminent domain.’” In fact, the Court found that the ESDC’s actions in the Columbia expansion is, “clear evidence of that reality. The unbridled use of eminent domain not only disproportionately affects minority communities, but threatens basic principles of property contained in the Fifth Amendment.”

For these and other reasons I request that you urge the ESDC not to appeal the Kaur decision. Please impose a statewide moratorium on further eminent domain actions and then let us work together on a legislative solution. I am currently working on a bill to reform how eminent domain is exercised in the State of New York. The purpose is not to hamper development, but to make the process more transparent and provide stakeholders with substantive due process. This will result in development that reflects community input and serves community needs. Your participation will be critical. An enlightened eminent domain procedure will be a significant victory for all involved.

I respectfully request your support on these issues and am ready to stand with you publicly again, this time for the purpose of announcing actions that will lead to genuine reform. Please feel free to contact me for any further discussion at 212-222-7315, or in my Albany office at 518-455-2441. I look forward to hearing from you at the earliest convenience, and I thank you in advance for your attention to this very important matter.

Very truly yours,

Senator Bill Perkins
30th District

Hiram's replacement is no angel, either...

From the Daily News:

Queens Assemblyman Jose Peralta landed more than $500,000 in taxpayer money for a nonprofit that never filed federal tax records, has no employees and has been inactive for more than two years.

Peralta helped organize the Corona-Elmhurst Center for Economic Development after joining the Legislature, and for years it was located in the same building as his campaign office.

This year, he and his chief political consultants have continued to lobby state and city lawmakers for additional grants for the dormant group, the Daily News has learned.

Until a month ago, the Corona-Elmhurst group maintained an office at 104-01 Roosevelt Ave., in a two-story commercial building, where Peralta rents space for his election committee.

As for the Corona-Elmhurst group, Peralta secured its first $125,000 grant in 2004 from the state's Economic Development Corp., for technical assistance for neighborhood businesses. The money was an earmark from the fund for pet projects of individual legislators.

Click the link to read the entire thing, which involves Peralta's family members.

Thanks to the reader who sent in the photo.

Court upholds eminent domain abuse by state

From Atlantic Yards Report:

In a decision (PDF) that gives the crucial--but perhaps not final--boost to the Atlantic Yards project, the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals, approved the use of eminent domain by a 6-1 margin, saying that it's not the role of the courts to intervene in agency decisions, given the wide latitude in state law.

The case, which involves nine petitioners (homeowners, commercial property owners, and residential and commercial renters) is known as Goldstein, et al. vs. New York State Urban Development Corporation d/b/a/ Empire State Development Corporation (or ESDC).

Project backers had long expressed confidence about the result, given the state court's general deference to agency decisionmaking, but the court's willingness to accept the case in the first place--the Appellate Division had unanimously upheld the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) in the first round--had left some room for ambiguity.

Moreover, two of the seven judges seemed quite skeptical of the ESDC, though the attorney for the nine petitioners faced similar skepticism. One of those judges, Robert Smith, filed a blistering dissent that stated:

[T]he majority is much too deferential to the self-serving determination by Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) that petitioners live in a "blighted" area, and are accordingly subject to having their homes seized and turned over to a private developer.

...It is clear to me from the record that the elimination of blight, in the sense of substandard and unsanitary conditions that present a danger to public safety, was never the bona fide purpose of the development at issue in this case.

"Just compensation" is just a joke to NY

From the Daily News:

Property owners challenging the condemnation of their homes and businesses for the Atlantic Yards project charged the state is adding insult to injury by lowballing offers for their property.

Chief opponent Daniel Goldstein got a letter offering $510,000 if his three-bedroom Pacific St. condo is taken by eminent domain. He paid $590,000 for it in 2003.

"They're supposed to pay just compensation and there's nothing just about it," he said.

The September letter from the Empire State Development Corp. says the offer "represents the fair market value" of the property.

But some local real estate experts disagreed. "That's way low. That's ridiculous," said Slope Heights Realty broker Tony Atterbury, who added a 1,290-square foot, two-bathroom apartment like Goldstein's could fetch somewhere between $720,000 and $900,000.