Council Members Look to Take on Eminent Domain
A number of City Council members say they’re going to try to get the state to change its eminent domain laws, according to an article in City Hall. Leading the charge is Council member Letitia James, who has been a vocal critic of Atlantic Yards. James says a Council drive to influence Albany is a…
A number of City Council members say they’re going to try to get the state to change its eminent domain laws, according to an article in City Hall. Leading the charge is Council member Letitia James, who has been a vocal critic of Atlantic Yards. James says a Council drive to influence Albany is a priority and that we are opening up the door wider and wider to the abuse of eminent domain by private businesses after the Council voted to OK Columbia’s expansion plan, which involves the use of eminent domain, in December. James argues that the use of eminent domain means the city is diverted from following the 197-a process (which allows community boards to develop land-use plans for their districts) and that property owners should have more time to challenge seizures. Council Speaker Christine Quinn hasn’t made a commitment to pressing the issue in Albany, however, and a rep for Mayor Bloomberg said that Changing state eminent domain laws is not currently on our Albany agenda.
Council Members to Push for Imminent Change of State Eminent Domain Laws [City Hall]
Photo by Steve Soblick.
“i respect that he/she is willing to show their identity.”
Identity?? A contrived Internet pseudonym is not exactly full disclosure, OK? And I’m not sure how a good point would be made more “valid” by attaching a registered “identity” to the observation.
“although i’ve disagreed with most everything that Polemicist posts, i respect that he/she is willing to show their identity.”
Who cares what you think? I don’t HAVE to log in, and just because of you, I NEVER will! HA HA!!
this is off-topic, but why don’t you “guests” log in? i’d think that one’s comments would carry more weight if they were attached to a consistent identity instead of remaining anonymous. i realize that one’s identity can be easily spoofed, but i think there’s still value in posting with an identity.
although i’ve disagreed with most everything that Polemicist posts, i respect that he/she is willing to show their identity.
well since DDDB is a 501c3 registered with the attorney general of the state of new york, and its a group that idiots on this board would love to “get” don’t think they’d have good reason not to lie about their funding on their website?
as for the guy way above who wrote that under Kelo “blight” is not required that is true. but under new york state law, nearly all eminent domain actions require a blight finding.
lastly, constitutional rights aren’t for sale. whether you are “an old widowder” or a condo owner or whatever.
“if the DDDB website can be believed (and i believe it can)”
HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha
4:27: i’m not exaggerating. if the DDDB website can be believed (and i believe it can), then you’re the one who’s exaggerating:
“DDDB is a volunteer-run organization. We have over 5,000 subscribers to our email newsletter, 7,000 petition signers, and a nine-person steering committee. Over 700 volunteers have registered with DDDB to form our various teams, task-forces and committees and we have over 150 block captains. We have a 20 person volunteer legal team of local lawyers supplementing our retained attorneys.
We are funded entirely by individual donations from the community at large and through various fundraising events we and supporters have organized.
We have the financial support of well over 3,000 individual donors.”
“REMEMBER: 40% OF THIS HUGE AREA IS RAILYARDS FROM THE MTA. THE OTHER 60% IS PRIVATE PROPERTY AND CITY STREETS/SIDEWALKS.”
You neglect to mention that the vast majority of that 60% is owned by Ratner.
4:17 wrote “i happen to be one of the anti-AY crowd, and i, as well as thousands of others, have donated time, money and services to the fight.”
Please do not exaggerate – there are maybe 75 active hardcore AY opponents and a few hundred others who might have donated a few dollars or attended a rally or 2.
2:19 – actually they don’t vote – at least the ones who enjoy street theater concerning Atlantic Yards (and presumably ED) don’t; Since in the last election virtually everyone who was in favor of AY and ED was handily re-elected – even in those races where the officials support of AY was made an issue.
Further – ED is “happening upstate” and everywhere else – because it is one of the most basic and necessary Governmental powers and is in-fact enumerated in the constitution.
This is exactly the longterm danger of the NIMBY fight against AY – the opponents really could care less about ED (or its “abuse”) – they just picked up on it because it was a convenient (especially before Kelo) tool to hopefully defeat the arena (main thing they oppose) and the density (secondary concern). However these same NIMBY’s push for laws to restrain ED – caring only about themselves (see Letitia James) and AY. Ignoring the fact that by restraining ED they would forever cause other necessary projects (like replacement of the Gowanus, new subway lines, new schools, etc…) to become even more expensive, if not impossible.