The Brooklyn Paper: New Yards suit — one day before the old Yards suit
The current issue
Neighborhood Map
Bay Ridge
  • Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights
Brooklyn Heights
  • Downtown, DUMBO
Carroll Gardens
  • Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Boerum Hill
Fort Greene
  • Clinton Hill, Crown Heights
North Brooklyn
  • Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
Park Slope
  • Prospect Heights, Windsor Terrace, Greenwood Heights
GO Brooklyn
Dining Guide
Where to GO
Events calendar
Classifieds
The Brooklyn Wire
Not Just Nets
Police Blotter
Perspective
Parenting
Politics
Transit
Podcasts
Brooklyn Cyclones
Merchant news
About The Paper
RSS Feeds
Tropicana, Atlantic City

New Yards suit — one day before the old Yards suit

By Gersh Kuntzman
The Brooklyn Paper
Enlarge this image
SHoP Architects
A new lawsuit says that the MTA's renegotiated "sweetheart" deal with Bruce Ratner to build this arena at the corner of Flatbush and Atlantic avenues is illegal, thanks to a 2005 law that requires competitive bidding.
Enlarge this image
Jim Epstein
Daniel Goldstein and his family remain the only residents of a Pacific Street building that would have to be torn down if Bruce Ratner is allowed to build his basketball arena.

Tools

Print this story
digg
del.icio.us

One day before a climactic court hearing that could clear a major legal barrier for Bruce Ratner, opponents of the developer’s residential, retail, office and arena mega-project filed another lawsuit this week, this time challenging the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s mid-summer “sweetheart” renegotiation with Ratner.

The suit, filed on Tuesday in state Supreme Court in Manhattan by a panoply of state legislators, plus Councilwoman Letitia James (D–Fort Greene), the NYPIRG/Straphangers Campaign and Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, seeks the annulment of that June deal to sell the Vanderbilt rail yard near the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic avenues with just a $20-million down payment.

The original 2005 deal with the MTA gave Ratner control of the Vanderbilt Yards for $100 million, even though it had been appraised at more than $271 million. In the ensuing controversy over that deal, the state passed the Public Authorities Accountability Act of 2005.

Opponents argue that the new law required the MTA “to obtain any appraisal of the current value of the yard [and] entertain any competing proposal for the yard.”

But when it rubber-stamped the renegotiated deal with Ratner in June, the agency did not do so.

Instead, the MTA “capitulated to [Ratner’s] demand and negotiated a disposition of the Vanderbilt Yard on terms significantly more favorable to [Ratner] than were approved in September, 2005,” the brief states.

Mac Support Store

In a statement, state Sen. Velmanette Montgomery, one of the plaintiffs, said, “We have laws in this state that forbid these kinds of sweetheart deals. With the Atlantic Yards, the MTA violated our legislation and the public trust. Their sale of the Vanderbilt Yard to Ratner must be annulled.”

A spokesman for the MTA, Kevin Ortiz, said simply, “We will not comment on pending litigation.”

Updated 06:36 pm, October, 15 2009: Story was updated to include more details.

©2009 Community Newspaper Group

←Atlantic Yards: State’s highest court hears Yards case
→Politics: Health care circus comes to Bay Ridge on Tuesday!

Reader Feedback

Al from Park Slope says:
I know, usually politicians are for progress. I guess she gets more campaign contributions from that develop and destroy group than the Brooklynites for a Stadium group. Lets be real about what this is truly about!!!!
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Raul from Prospect Heights says:
This suit distills how the state is bending over to help Ratner at the expense of New Yorkers. The very generous terms of the Vanderbilt Yards sale hurt the New York economy because it makes the MTA's cash flow problems worse, increasing the likelihood of fare hikes and service cuts.

Let's say that the Ratner proposal deserves public subsidies. Why give him those subsidies through a reduced sale price? Isn't there a better, more transparent way to encourage development?

Of all the suits that the community has brought against Ratner, this is the one that deserves the full support of anyone who rides the subways or anyone who benefits from a well run transportation system. I am very proud that someone is standing up to the MTA's back room deals.
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:46 pm
HappyLeader from New York says:
Sam and Al.... you boggle my mind!
Letitia James is the ONLY politician in all of New York who had the courage to oppose BUMberg's term limits, and to oppose the taxpayers' giveaway to RATner. And you put her down? She is the best!
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Al from Park Slope says:
Well, considering that the land deal was trying to get done when the real estate market was hot, Develop and destroy has delayed the deal for so long, Ratner appears to be getting the land at the current fair market rate value based on the economy and the current real estate market.

And secondly, EVERY politician is full of $@#T in that they are all beholden to whomever they are getting their money from and their spin is basically who they are protecting. If Leticia James voted against Anything.. its because her "financial fat cat benefactors" wanted her to. None of these politicians are for THE people, they are for whomever donates enough to get them elected..

Politics is a dirty business and to believe that there are honorable clean candidates who can get elected into office anywhere w/o owing LOTS of favors is right up there with believing in the Easter Bunny & Santa Claus
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:15 pm
s from brooklyn says:
these people do not understand how great this arean would be for brooklyn yet alone new york.. this is why we as a nation are so behind.. because of nimrods like them trying to protest against a great project!
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm
al pankin from downtown says:
another bunch of fools looking for their 15 minutes of fame, a waste ot time and money. they musy like that dump of an area and the big hole in the ground for the last 60 years.
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Sid from Boerum Hill says:
In fact Leticia James voted against the interest of the party that gave her the council seat. Working Families was in favor and yet she for her reasons voted against it. You really need to get out more.
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
Hey 's', great arean? What the hell is that? We as a nation? So are you saying the people who live in crap water arkansas are behind this? Who are you anyway? Do you speak for all Americans? Was there a national referendum on this perpetual disaster?
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:22 pm
harriet from Brooklyn says:
Says Al: "Well, considering that the land deal was trying to get done when the real estate market was hot, Develop and destroy has delayed the deal for so long, Ratner appears to be getting the land at the current fair market rate value based on the economy and the current real estate market."

I hope you remember that Ratner originally bid $50 million, but because DDDb found another developer, Extell, to bid $150 million, Ratner was forced to raise his bid to $100 million. That's still under the appraised value of $214.5 million, which seems extremely low to me. One-family buildings in Prospect Heights go for over $2 million, so Ratner is getting a sweet deal no matter how you cut it. Prospect Heights real estate is one of the few bright spots in New York, even though the area owned by Ratner has been left to rot.

Al, if you're so angry about dirty politicians, then why not direct your rage at the MTA and the state government that bent over backwards to give away the public's land for a song?
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Jim from Park Slope says:
Letita James made it clear during her campaign that she was unequivocally opposed to the AY project. She won in a landslide, so it's wrong to say she's betraying the interests of her constituents or beholden to special interests. Know what you're talking about before you speak Al.
Wednesday, Oct 14, 2009 at 4:39 am
Al from Park Slope says:
Seems the NY Islanders would like to move to the Brooklyn Arena as well. hmmm, Basketball, Hockey, Concerts, Events...... THIS MUST BE STOPPED!!!!!!

And I hope you are not making being endorsed by the working family mob group a good thing. They show that the dirty republican Bush style politics have an eqally disturbing left wing rival.
Wednesday, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Bayof from Biscay says:
Recently visited the once vital but now decrepit downtowns of Syracuse, Scenectady and Utica New York enroute to sparkling Toronto. .. Would James, Montgomery, Goldstein and other fake populists visit upstate's deterioration on Brooklyn? Would they have their provincialism, suburban fantasies and jealousy thwart this magnificent project? Or do they rejoice in downtown's continued drabness. Our under-parked, under museumed, modest borough needs the economic and cultural jolt Atlantic Yards will provide.
Wednesday, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Joey from Clinton Hills says:
I think Al, Bayof, Sam, S, are probably all the same Ratner employee.

Jim from Park Slope has it right!
Wednesday, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
@Joey, me thinks you are right. It's the attack of the sock puppets!

@AL, yes it must be stopped. Traffic is a nightmare in the area already. At rush hour it is a standstill, at night pedestrians risk their lives crossing Flatbush ave. Imagine after a game?
Wednesday, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Al from Park Slope says:
@ 4th Estate. The funny thing is I would imagine that after a game, the traffic police presence for cars and pedestrians would be just what the area needs on most current days. It's more unfortunate that there are not traffic cops in the area at all times from 7AM to 7PM the way they would be pre and post games/concerts.

I would disagree with Bayof in regards to comapring brooklyn's current "decrepitness" and any future plans, stadium or not, with the issues of Syracuse Utica....etc. unfortunately though, the main reason that part of Brooklyn is so viable currently is because of its proximity to Manhattan and not because of its own self sustaining city business

Its also not a fantasy to have a suburban feel in brooklyn, however it should not be in the urban city centers of the borough... it should be in the Kensington type areas that currently exist as "Suburban Brooklyn"
Thursday, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:28 am
Bayof from Biscay says:
No, Joey and Fourth Estate. I'm not shilling for Ratner, though I admire his grand vision. Manhatten overweens; Brooklyn should ween more. This may be its moment.
Thursday, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:09 am

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not BrooklynPaper.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to BrooklynPaper.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.