Similar stories

Letters: Ratner’s ‘Blood Money’ fills the mailbag

Letters: Two John Jay HS principals fire back at The Paper

Atlantic Yards: Marty goes on the record on Barclays

Atlantic Yards: Clarke meets with Barclays bigs

Letters: Library responds to ‘censorship’ charge

Atlantic Yards: Clarke to Ratner: Fear the Wrath of Congress

Tools

Print this story

digg

del.icio.us

Email a friend

Your name

Your email address

Recipients’ email addresses (Up to ten, separated by commas.)

To the editor,

I would like to commend The Brooklyn Paper for its coverage of the Atlantic Yards project.

Some have attacked you for your coverage, but I found it realistic, thoughtful, and honest. You covered the pertinent issues of public financing, traffic congestion, building heights, jobs, eminent domain, infrastructure impact, and the eventual need for additional city resources.

More important, you made the connection between politics and money. You pointed out how democratic principles and citizen involvement have been excluded from the process. You provided the public with more than a superficial overview of the project.

You provided insight into how a project of such immense proportions and impact could sidetrack and deny community involvement.

You showed how an ill-conceived project would completely alter the physical and aesthetic qualities of the environment, to the detriment of its inhabitants.

You clearly showed how the rules were dictated by politicians to benefit a few connected individuals.

If this project is completed as it is now designed, not only will the community suffer, but so will democracy. I applaud your reporting.

Thank you for the in-depth coverage.

Morris Kornbluth, Park Slope

Maybe not

To the editor,

I was extremely disappointed in your story (“Blood Money,” Jan. 20). It’s a sad state of journalism and wrong-minded liberalism. It’s fine for The Brooklyn Paper to oppose Atlantic Yards, but the depths you will go in your opposition must be tempered with good sense.

Many countries, industries, business, and organizations benefited from African slavery, so it is completely wrong and disingenuous to point out one such company in an obvious attempt to gain support for a cause that has absolutely nothing to do with slavery.

Indicting the bank with these evil deeds does nothing to help the people who suffered from these actions. Ultimately, the battle of Atlantic Yards is between people who have prospered because of what Barclays and many others have done.

Tenolian Bell, Fort Greene

• • •

To the editor,

Are you joking? I realize from your past coverage that you’ll stop at nothing to bash Atlantic Yards and Bruce Ratner, but now you’ve embarrassed yourselves.

Last week, you featured the outrage of Roger Green to buttress your nonsensical “Blood Money” story (“Black leaders rip Ratner’s $400M Barclays arena deal,” Jan. 27) while at the same time running a small article patting yourself on the back for receiving an award for an anti-Green editorial titled “No Votes for a Thief.”

I guess that Mr. Green’s “disgrace” can be overlooked as long as he spews some anti-Ratner rhetoric The Paper can use. Pathetic. Jon Derow, Park Slope

Editor’s note: As with a broken clock, Roger Green can, occasionally, be right, you know.

Then again…

To the editor,

Your recent articles concerning Barclays Bank paying $400 million to Bruce Ratner for naming rights to the Nets arena proves my previous observations why taxpayers should just say no to using public funds for any new major sports stadiums (“Blood Money,” Jan. 20).

In ancient Rome, government attempted to curry favor with the masses by offering free bread and circuses. Today, we have sports pork.

How sad that city taxpayers are continually asked to pay for new stadiums. Public dollars on the city, state and federal level are subsidizing a private-sector business. The only real beneficiaries of these expenditures are team owners and their multimillion-dollar players.

It is impossible to judge the amount of new economic activities that these so-called public benefits will generate. Between selling the stadium name (Ratner raised $400 million for himself with that one deal!), season skyboxes and reserve seating, cable, television and radio revenues, concession refreshment and souvenir sales along with rental income for other sports, rock concerts and other commercial events, it is hard to believe that Ratner and other team owners can’t finance their new stadiums by themselves.

The city’s municipal debt has grown to $55 billion. The per-resident capital debt of $6,800 makes the Big Apple number one nationally.

As Raymond Keating wrote in a Cato Institute report, “public subsidies pad the bottom lines of team owners and boost player salaries while offering no real economic benefit to the cities involved.” Scarce taxpayer funds would be better spent elsewhere.

Let the current team owners sell the stadium name, float their own bonds or issue stock to finance new stadiums! Please don’t pick the pockets of taxpayers!

Larry Penner, Great Neck, New York

• • •

To the editor,

The bigger story for me regarding Atlantic Yards is the way the state Assembly reneged on its promise to fund a real analysis or environmental impact statement to be completed by the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods (“Roger cuts ‘green’ for Yards review,” Jan. 6). Hundreds of hours were put in by some of the most prestigious and highly qualified professional engineering and urban planning companies. Roger Green put the kibosh on the money. I think there is more to the story (just a gut feeling). I guess the promise should have been in writing, but time was of the essence. The next insult is the the extra $100 million for Atlantic Yards in the mayor’s budget [see this week’s front page].

One of your editors should write a book on this scandal down the line. If not you, Norman Oder will do it.

You have been doing great work. I hope the publisher gives you a raise, but I am not holding my breath.

Paul Heller, Park Slope

Norman conquest

To the editor,

In his not-so-judicious review of “Brooklyn Matters” (“Anti-Ratner movie debuts,” Jan. 27), The Paper’s film critic, Baker Hollingsworth, deemed me and my Atlantic Yards Report blog “overexposed.”

Given that The Paper labeled another article in the same issue as an “exclusive” even though it had been posted a month earlier on my blog, it might have been wiser to use the term “underexposed.”

Norman Oder, Park Slope

Editor’s note: The writer produces the award-winning “Atlantic Yards Report” Web site. The award was from The Brooklyn Paper last year.

Help that man!

To the editor,

The grandkids who are trying to kick out Dominick Diomede (“94-years-old and homeless,” Jan. 13) are heartless!!!

They’re jerks and I hope NO ONE rents the apartment after they kick out Dominick. It would serve them right to have that apartment sit empty forever.

Renee Page, Dallas, Texas

©2007 The Brooklyn Paper