| Timeline
of Events |
Acronym
Guide:
FCR - Forest City Ratner
ESDC - Empire State Development Corporation
(Chairman Patrick Foye)
PACB - Public Authorities Control Board (Silver,
Bruno, Pataki)
IBO - Independent Budget Office
NYCEDC - New York City Economic Development
Corporation
SEQRA - State Environmental Qualitry Review
Act
DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Statement
EIS - Environmental Impact Statement
ULURP - Uniform Land Use Review
Procedure |
|
WHAT'S PENDING as of August 14, 2008:
Slow
Economy Likely to Stall Atlantic Yards
NY Times. March 21, 2008
NJ
group explores bringing Nets to Newark
The Star-Ledger. May 1, 2008.
--------------------------------------
August 4, 2008
- Goldstein et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation
Nine Property Owners and Tenants File Atlantic Yards Eminent Domain Challenge
in New York State Court
Petitioners Seek to Prevent New York State’s Seizure of Their
Homes and Businesses by Eminent Domain
Click
to download pdf of the petition.
DDDB et al. v. ESDC et al.
State lawsuit against the Atlantic Yards Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) and approval.
Appeal argument to be held on September 17th, 2pm.
New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division, First
Department
27 Madison Avenue at 24th Street
July 7, 2008
DDDB and 25 Co-Plaintiffs File Appeal in Lawsuit Against the Empire State
Development Corporation, MTA & PACB
Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn Supreme Court Decision on
Suit Seeking to Annul Fatally Flawed Environmental Impact Statement and
Approval of Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards Proposal
Click to download pdf of
the appeal
--------------------------------------
June 23, 2008:
The US Supreme Court declined to accept the plaintiffs' petition.
The plaintiffs will pursue the defense of their rights in New York state
court. Press Release
Goldstein
et a. v. Pataki et al.
Federal Eminent Domain Lawsuit -11 Homeowners, business owners and tenants
are challenging the Constitutionality of NY State's use of eminent domain
to seize their properties.
On March 31, 2008, the plaintiffs
filed a petition to the United States Supreme Court to hear their
case.
The questions presented to the Court and the petition itself can be found
here.
Kelo
Sequel to Court
By Lyle Denniston. SCOTUSblog.com. April 1, 2008.
More coverage of the filing from the
Atlantic Yards Report and an roundup
of other coverage here.
--------------------------------------
Previously:
DDDB et al. v. ESDC et al.
State lawsuit against the Atlantic Yards Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) and approval
Preliminary appeal briefs are here.
The Appellate Court has set the appeal schedule. Plaintiffs are to file
their appeal briefs in July, and there will be an argument scheduled in
the September (2008) term.
More information
here.
On January 11th, State Supreme Court Judge Joan Madden issued her decision
against the community plaintiffs challenging the review and approval of
the Atlantic Yards project.
The judge's decision is here [pdf].
DDDB's press release is here.
We believe the case was wrongly decided and are appealing.
Atlantic Yards Report coverage is here.
--------------------------------------
For Immediate Release: February 1, 2008
New York, NY— The Second Circuit Court today ruled against 14 homeowners,
business owners and tenants in their appeal of their lawsuit alleging
that New York State's use of eminent domain to take their properties for
Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project violates the United States
Constitution.
Plaintiffs' attorney Matthew Brinckerhoff said, "Today's decision is disappointing.
We disagree with its conclusion. We intend to ask the US Supreme Court
to hear our case, and will continue to pursue every avenue available to
prevent the unlawful seizure of my clients' homes for Bruce Ratner's enrichment.
The court today affirmed that the government is free to take private homes
and businesses and give them to influential citizens as long as one can
imagine a conceivable benefit to the public, no matter how small or unlikely
it may be. Indeed, it does not matter if all evidence points to a secret
back room deal. All corrupt politicians need do to insulate themselves
from judicial scrutiny is claim a benefit to the public. This is wrong.
It should trouble all citizens who, unlike Bruce Ratner, lack the power
and money to coopt the governments' power of eminent domain for their
private use. We believe that the United States Supreme Court will welcome
the opportunity to clarify this area in light of its widely criticized
Kelo
decision."
Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn legal director Candace Carponter said,
"Our support of the fight of citizens to live safely in their homes, and
operate safely in their business, will continue. We maintain that the
government's motivation in using eminent domain for Atlantic Yards is
not to benefit the public, but rather, to benefit a single, very rich
and powerful developer. The seizure of our neighbors' homes and businesses
is at the very foundation of the Atlantic Yards project. It is a foundation
that must not stand. Now is the time for our elected
leaders, who have frequently expressed grave concern about the abuse
of eminent domain, to publicly stand in defense of everyday Brooklynites
and New Yorkers."
The 2nd Circuit Court's opinion on the case, Goldstein v. Pataki,
can be found at: http://www.dddb.net/php/reading/legal/eminentdomain
On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal
eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal
brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs
are appealing Judge
Garaufis' June 6th decision.
On September 20th plaintiffs filed their reply to the defendants' response
to the appeal. That reply brief is here
[pdf]. All legal briefs since the case was filed in October 2006 are here.
Oral argument on the appeal was heard on October 9th. The three judge
panel can decide on the plaintiffs appeal any time. Press coverage of
the courtroom argument, and other related news, follows:
Appellate
judge's recusal may be good news for AY eminent domain plaintiffs
Atlantic Yards Report. January 16, 2008.
Moment
of Truth: Court to determine if Ratner gets land
Brooklyn Paper.
Atlantic
Yards case is strong
Editorial. Brooklyn Paper.
Eminent
domain appeal faces engaged but skeptical panel
Atlantic Yards Report
Judge
Hears Arguments In Brooklyn Eminent Domain Case
NY1
Brooklyn
lawyer: Arena not a public use
USAToday (AP)
U.S.
Court Hears Opponents of Atlantic Yards Argue for Reinstating Suit
NY Times
Arguments
Are Heard in Atlantic Yards Case
NY Times' City Room blog
WHAT'S PENDING as of January 10, 2008:
State Supreme Court Case Challenging the Review & Approval
of "Atlantic Yards"
After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB
et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental
review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said
she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.On July 17 the court
contacted the attorneys for the parties to announce that the court clerk
has changed the case's designation from "standard" to "complex,"
and that Justice Madden has up to 120 days to render a decision. 120 days
from the May 3rd oral argument was on August 31st; which means that today
marks 252 days since the oral argument.
A decision can come any time.
Federal Eminent Domain Lawsuit
On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal
eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal
brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs
are appealing Judge
Garaufis' June 6th decision.
On September 20th plaintiffs filed their reply to the defendants' response
to the appeal. That reply brief is here
[pdf]. All legal briefs since the case was filed in October 2006 are here.
Oral argument on the appeal was heard on October 9th. The three judge
panel can decide on the plaintiffs appeal any time. Press coverage of
the courtroom argument follows:
Moment
of Truth: Court to determine if Ratner gets land
Brooklyn Paper.
Atlantic
Yards case is strong
Editorial. Brooklyn Paper.
Eminent
domain appeal faces engaged but skeptical panel
Atlantic Yards Report
Judge
Hears Arguments In Brooklyn Eminent Domain Case
NY1
Brooklyn
lawyer: Arena not a public use
USAToday (AP)
U.S.
Court Hears Opponents of Atlantic Yards Argue for Reinstating Suit
NY Times
Arguments
Are Heard in Atlantic Yards Case
NY Times' City Room blog
WHAT'S PENDING as of October 4, 2007:
State Supreme Court Case Challening the Review & Approval of
"Atlantic Yards"
After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et.
al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental
review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she
would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.On July 17 the court contacted
the attorneys for the parties to announce that the court clerk has changed
the case's designation from "standard" to "complex,"
and that Justice Madden has up to 120 days to render a decision. 120 days
from the May 3rd oral argument was on August 31st; which means that today
marks 154 days since the oral argument.
This means that a decision can come any time.
Federal Eminent Domain Lawsuit
On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal
eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal
brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs
are appealing Judge
Garaufis' June 6th decision.
On September 20th plaintiffs filed their reply to the defendants' response
to the appeal. That reply brief is here
[pdf]. All legal briefs since the case was filed in October 2006 are here.
Oral argument on the appeal is scheduled for this Tuesday Oct.
9, at 10am at 500 Pearl Street in Manhattan. Ceremonial Courtroom (9th
Floor). [Map]
WHAT'S PENDING as of August 23, 2007:
After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB
et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental
review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she
would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.Today, June 19, marks 10
weeks since the oral argument. On July 17 the court contacted the attorneys
for the parties to announce that the case has changed the case's designation
from "standard" to "complex," and that Justice Madden
has up to 120 days to render a decision. 120 days from the May 3rd oral
argument would take us to August 31st.
On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal
eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal
brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs
are appealing Judge
Garaufis' June 6th decision.
Oral argument on the appeal is scheduled for Oct.
9, 10am.
WHAT'S PENDING as of June 13, 2007:
Complete, comprehensive coverage of the May 3rd court hearing in the Manhattan
State Supreme Court in front of Justice Joan Maden, can be found at the
Atlantic Yards Report: ESDC
grilled over blight, “civic project” in EIS lawsuit hearing,
but judge’s latitude may be limited.
After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et.
al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul
the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice
Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.Today,
June 13, is 6 weeks, so a decision could come any day.
On June 6th Eastern District Justice Nicholas Garaufis issued a
decision on the defendants' motion to dismiss the federal
eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki. While Judge Garaufis
rejected the defendants' three motions attempting to push the case out of
federal court and into state court, he decided to dimiss the case for plaintiffs'
failure to state a claim. We stronlgy believe that the Court erred in its
decision and there will be an appeal on the decision brought to the 2nd
Circutin Court. We are cautiously optimistic that the plaintiffs can win
their appeal and move on to a trial to show how the use of eminent domain
for Altnatic Yards violates the US Constituion. Our view on the decision
and the appeal can be found in our e-newsletter
from June 7th, 2007.
Atlantic Yards Report covered the decision, Judge
dismisses federal eminent domain lawsuit; appeal planned, as
did the NY
Times and the New
York Law Journal
WHAT'S PENDING as of May 7, 2007:
Complete, comprehensive coverage of the May 3rd court hearing in the Manhattan
State Supreme Court in front of Justice Joan Maden, can be found at the
Atlantic Yards Report: ESDC
grilled over blight, “civic project” in EIS lawsuit hearing,
but judge’s latitude may be limited.
After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et.
al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul
the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice
Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.
Simultaneously a decision on the defendants' motion to dismiss
the federal eminent
domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki,can come any day from Eastern
District Justice Nicholas Garaufis. The most recent inforamtion regarding
that case is also found at Atlantic Yards Report: Another
look at the eminent domain hearing: signs point both ways
Thursday, May 3rd. 3:30pm
Oral Argument in Manhattan State Supreme Court on the environmental
lawsuit
DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al.
60
Centre Street, Room 351
Justice Joan Madden
WHAT'S PENDING as of April 5, 2007:
On April 5 DDDB and 25 co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit
in State Supreme Court seeking to annul the Environmental Review and approval
of the "Atlantic Yards" project. The named defendants are the Empire
State Development Corporation (ESDC), the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB),
the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), and Forest City Ratner. A summary
of the lawsuit's causes of actions are here.
Success in the suit would send "Atlantic Yards" back to the ESDC for
a complete or partial new environmental review and a new vote by the PACB. But
this time, all of that would occur under the reform-minded Spitzer Administration.
Oral arguments in the Manhattan State Supreme Court House are scheduled for May
3rd at 3:30 pm.
WHAT'S PENDING as of January 1, 2007:
On December 20th the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB) voted to
approve the "Atlantic Yards" project, just 11 days before
Governor Pataki left office and despite an incredible dearth of pertinent
and crucial financial
information, housing guarantees, and many
unanswered questions.
This means that the project has passed its one and only political vote
by three-men-in-a-room.
Big questions remain:
- Will Governor Spitzer and his Administration weigh in?
- There is a pending federal
eminent domain lawsuit, and the project cannot be built if the property
owners and tenants win their suit.
Oral arguments for that lawsuit are scheduled for February 7th in the
Eastern District. Legal briefs can be found here.
- A legal challenge to the Environmental Impact Statement could come
any day.
WHAT'S PENDING as of December 8, 2006:
The ESDC approved the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and
its findings, the findings and determinations under the state's Eminent
Domain Procedure Law (approving its use), and a modified General Project
Plan. All of those documents can be found here: www.empire.state.ny.us/atlanticYards.
Next up vote, which must be unanimous, by the Public
Authorities Control Board (PACB), which is controlled by the Governor,
the Assembly Speaker Silver, and the Senat Majority Leader Bruno. That
vote could occur on December 20th.
Lawsuits are expected on the FEIS. There is currently a federal lawsuit
challenging the constitutionality of the use of eminent domain for Atlantic
Yards. That case, filed
on October 26th, is in the Eastern District.
WHAT'S PENDING as of November 15, 2006:
The Finale Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
was released by the Empire State
Development Corporation (ESDC) on November 15, 2006. The very large document
can be found here: www.empire.state.ny.us/AtlanticYards/FEIS.asp
The ESDC is supposed to respond to every comment made by the public. Chapter
24 includes those commetns and responses: click
here to download the pdf of Chapter 24.
The ESDC now has a minimum of ten days to approve the findings of the
FEIS. That vote is expected sometime around November 28th. The ESDC will
then pass the project along to the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB).
The PACB vote–controlled by Assembly Speaker Silver, Senate majority
Leader Bruno, and the Governor–requires unanimity
for passage.
Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn intends to go to court to challenge the
grossly
deficient FEIS.
Completed:
WHAT'S PENDING as of September
29, 2006:
The public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) has ended.
Enormous amounts of comments were submitted to the Empire State Development
Corporation (ESDC) by scores of organizations and hundreds of individuals.
Click here for links to some
of these comment submissions.
Now the ESDC must review all these comments and respond to them in a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).
That FEIS could legally come out as soon as October 9, 2006, but with the
amount of responses submitted to ESDC that is highly unlikely. Though ESDC
is clearly trying to fast-track their approval we expect that the FEIS will
not be released until late October or November. But it is a sign of the
continuing non-public, and non-transparent process that the public does
not even receive basic information like a timeline.
Once the FEIS is released the ESDC Board will then vote to approve it which
is expected to be a rubberstamp. This would include approval of eminent
domain.
Then the Public Authorties Control Board (PACB)–comprised of Assembly
Speaker Silver, Senate Majority Leader Bruno and the Governor will have
to vote on the project.
As all of this is going on, lawsuits from the public are expected.
COMPLETED as of September 29, 2006: Next
hearings scheduled on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS):
Tuesday, September 12, 2006 –
4:30 pm – 8 pm
at the New York City College of Technology (Klitgord Auditorium)
285 Jay Street, Brooklyn
We are urging people not to attend the 9/12 hearing. Here
is why
Monday, September 18, 2006 – 4:30
pm – 8 pm
at the New York City College of Technology (Klitgord Auditorium)
285 Jay Street, Brooklyn
COMMENTS TO THE ESDC MUST BE SUBMITTED BY:
Written comments must be RECEIVED by the ESDC no later than 5:30 PM, Friday,
September 22, 2006. Send your comments (delivery receipt and signature
requested) to:
Atlantic Yards c/o ESDC
Empire State Develpment Corporation
633 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Email your comments (delivery receipt option selected) to:
atlanticyards@empire.state.ny.us
**PLEASE NOTE:
Please Email a copy of your DEIS submissions to:
cbrookynneighborhoods@hotmail.com.
Hard copy to:
Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods
201 Dekalb Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11205.
THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING
FOR COMMENT ON THE DEIS ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23RD
Click here for some of the testimony
submitted at the hearing.
JULY 18, 2006
The ESDC has authorized the release of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) and the General Project Plan (GPP)
•
Download the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
•
Download the General Project Plan (GPP)
MAY 16, 2006
As of today, given the recent release of the Final
Scope, we're waiting for a Draft Environmental Impact (EIS) statement
to be issued in late May or early June by the Empire State Development
Corporation (ESDC), which is supervising the project.
After that, there will be a time period--a few months, or possibly longer--for
a hearing and for comments in response to the draft EIS, its flaws, and
regarding mitigation of the potential impacts. A few months later, a Final
Environmental Impact Statement will announce such mitigation or where
the developer and agency conclude that no mitigation is possible. The
EIS can more likely be challenged in court on the grounds of process rather
than content.
The final EIS must be approved by the ESDC, and the Public Authorities
Control Board (PACB) must also approve the project. The PACB is controlled
by Gov. George Pataki, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, and Assembly
Speaker Sheldon Silver. Silver killed the proposed West Side Stadium,
and the New York Observer reported
that he would follow the lead of the local elected member of Assembly,
Roger Green, who supports the plan. Given that the Assembly has already
approved $33 million for the project, would the election of Atlantic Yards
opponent Bill
Batson to succeed Green (who's running for Congress) change the equation
at the PACB? Unclear.
Also, given that Forest City Ratner has not and likely will not acquire
all the residential and commercial property it needs to commence the project,
the ESDC will move to take the property via eminent domain. A lawsuit
challenging the use of eminent domain is not unlikely.
Also pending is a challenge
to the ESDC's use of a lawyer who had just been working for the developer.
However, the agency has hired a replacement so as not to delay the approval
process.
Bruce Ratner has said
he expects construction to begin in the fall--but legal challenges, as
well as challenges to the environmental review process, might well delay
that.
From the Final Scope
The ESDC's Final Scope
of Analysis, a prelude to the Draft EIS, lays out the following actions:
At this time, it is expected that the proposed project will require the
following actions:
--Adoption of the GPP [General Project Plan] by ESDC, including overrides
of certain local laws (described below);
--Override by ESDC of certain aspects of the New York City Zoning Resolution,
including, but not limited to, use and bulk (including height and setback,
floor area, and yards), signage, and parking requirements and allowances;
--Override by ESDC of the ATURA [Atlantic Terminal Urban Renewal Area]
Plan as it relates to Site 5 and Site 6A (which requires consistency with
zoning);
--Override of the City Map as it relates to Pacific Street between Flatbush
and 6th Avenues, 5th Avenue between Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, and
Pacific Street between Vanderbilt and Carlton Avenues;
--Acquisition of property by ESDC through negotiation or condemnation
and subsequent disposition of the property (by sale or long-term lease)
to the project sponsors or local development corporation;
--Approval by the Public Authorities Control Board;
--Disposition by MTA of a property interest in the rail yard to ESDC,
project sponsors, or a local development corporation;
--Approval by MTA of relocated and upgraded rail yard and other transit
improvements, and any related real property acquisitions by LIRR or MTA;
--Provision of state and city funding for affordable housing and other
elements of the proposed project and tax exempt financing;
--Condemnation by ESDC of the City’s interest in Pacific Street and 5th
Avenue (as described above); and
--Condemnation or acquisition by ESDC or disposition by the City of the
City’s interest in Site 5 and other City-owned property within the project
site.
|
