In the District
With so many people from outside the 11th Congressional district weighing in on what ought to happen there, we figured it was about time to take a stroll down to the area surrounding the proposed Atlantic Yards Plan to speak to actual residents about the issues that will affect their choice in that race.
At least within the area that will be directly affected by the development, there still seemed to be some confusion about who was actually running, and the Atlantic Yards project, unsurprisingly was the big issue.
Here's what three residents said.
Kiane Zawadi, 73, said in a brief interview on 5th Avenue off of Flatbush, "I'm trying to think of who the candidates are, Yvette Clarke, and who else?"
When provided with the names of the other candidates, Zawadi, of Prospect Heights, only reacted to Chris Owens, a familiar surname name for longtime residents of the district. "I think he needs to go further than his father."
Zawadi is opposed to the Atlantic Yards Plan, and said that his opposition would weigh heavily on the candidate he chooses this fall.
"I think Brooklyn should be kept the way it is, you know, all these high rises going up. Plus I don't like the idea of eminent domain."
Down the street, Tracy Santos, 24, also of Prospect Heights, said she had received campaign literature in the mail, but couldn't name any of the featured candidates. Santos is also opposed to the Atlantic Yards proposal--a common position within the footprint of the plan--saying, "I don't really want an arena two blocks over, you know, I've seen the area around Yankee stadium and it's not pretty."
On 4th Avenue with his girlfriend, Emilio D., 37, who lives near the Atlantic Terminal, said he has received emails from Chris Owens through friends, but is still undecided on the best candidate to support.
"I haven't seen anything that makes one different from another," he said. "It would be nice to keep it a majority-minority district because, given the representation in Congress, I think it would be good. But I don't want it to be just soley based on the individual's race because they do have to make good on the issues, in addition to their race."
And about that picture: it's Yassky's office at about 9:45 this morning. Since we were in the neighborhood.
—Nicole Brydson UPDATE: In the wake of his cancelled press conference yesterday, Carl Andrews has officially rescheduled his event for Sunday, on the steps of City Hall. Eliot Spitzer, David Paterson, Bill Thompson and David Dinkins will all be there to endorse.
For the umpteenth time: Congress has approximately ZERO to do with the Ratner project. Chris Owens, and anyone else, including the media, that implies that it does, should be ashamed of themselves for confusing the electorate.
Congress can affect the Ratner project by stopping (transportation, other types of federal money)funding for states or cities that engage in the practice of using emminent domain to take private property form its owners to give to other private interests. For that to happen they would be better off helping the GOP keep the house.
And more.
Anyone who thinks politicians don't have power at the federal to affect their district in any way is an idiot. Chris Owens, if elected (he's the only candidate against the project) has said he'll do a number of things to prevent the project from going forward.
Note that the gov't cut off funding for eminent domain at the federal level when the New London case was decided. Not exactly the same thing, but you get the idea.
That eminent domain bill has an explicit loophole for sports arenas. Really, look it up. It doesn't apply to the use of eminent domain when used in development project involving sports arenas. Nice work DDDB. Provide liberal cover for a bill whose negative effect will be to endanger affordable housing. I mean, it is such a bad bill, being sponsored by the House GOP and Rep. Sensenbrenner, no less.
Sigh. Yeah, a freshman Rep in the minority can stop the project. Dream on. Even if the Democrats take back the House it's, at best, a long shot that Chris could do anything. This is especially true since he's not going to win.
HR 4128 was introduced by GOP Rep Sensenbrenner, who, interestingly enough, is also helping to stall passage of the Voting Rights Act reauthorization in the House, another issue of importance to the 11th.
In general, HR 4128 prohibits the use of eminent domain for economic development.
More specifically, the bill defines economic development broadly to mean any "enterprise carried on for profit, or to increase tax revenue, tax base, employment, or general economic health."
Some exemptions to the proposed regulation include transportation projects, and SPORTS FACILITIES.
it has no such exemption, and if its such a right wing bill why did it pass with only something like 34 against?
Sec. 8 (Definitions) contains a phrase that there are exemptions for "common carriers that make the property available for use by the general public as of right, such as a railroad, or public facility."
What that means, and whether it will include sports facilities will not be determined by anyone on this blog, unless they are a Federal Judge, but it could potentially include sports stadiums, and some believe it will.
However, the bigger problem with the bill is that it is very broad, and that it will do more to hinder economic development than it will to reduce abusive acts of eminent domain which are real and should be addressed. Its a very bad bill and many Dems voted for it only after being assured that it will never pass the Senate.
well thats nice, but if you are the same anon as above you said that it had exceptions for "sports facilities" and it clearly doesn't. as for whether or not its a bad bill, if it were to pass the senate it would make state gov't think very hard before abusing and broadly using eminent domain when unnecessary which is clearly the case with the "Atlantic Yards" proposal.
I'm not a fan of Cong. Sensenbrenner but 4:46 is only 100% wrong in saying he is helping to stall passage of the Voting Rights Act reauthorization. Sensenbrenner is the SPONSOR of the reauthorization!
The idea that a freshman congressman could have much of an effect on a local issue when ALL the political figures of any importance in the city and state are [and will be] supporters of the project is just damn silly.
The critics of the program have lost momentum and moreover have lost an opportunity to seek compromises early in the process.
They lost the opportunity by being pig-headed and think they could stop the project all together. Anyone with any political sense would realize that. And the reason why there was no one with a political sense available is that the critics antagonized them from the beginning.
The posts here all reflect that mentality, if it can be called that. Never give up, is not a political slogan. It's a military slogan and a radical slogan. But this is neither a military campaign nor a radical "aux barricades" campaign.
So now, with the money committed and Bloomberg, Pataki, Silver, Schumer, etc. on Ratner's side, it's all but over.
Next time, learn the lesson early: compromise and win.
Congresman Sensenbrenner and Speaker Hastert didn't do their homework. Their own rules require that 50% of the House GOP must support a bill before it goes to the floor. They didn't recognize the grassroots opposition, thinking that triumphing a minority issue, with bipartisan support, would trump their own weirdos. Bad call. But Sensenbrenner, who is a bit imperious, is behind the Black Caucus-supported (and whose Chair Mel Watt) heavily drafted HR9. The DNC already has mud on its face for letting an unknowing staffer blast Sensenbrenner, not realizing it was his own bill!
Yo bobbo-
"So now, with the money committed and Bloomberg, Pataki, Silver, Schumer, etc. on Ratner's side, it's all but over."
Every time someone uses the "it's all over" argument, I make the comparison with upcoming the war in Iran. Bush is in favor of it, Cheney is in favor of it, Rumsfield is in favor of it, so we all might as well go along with it. Well, maybe we'll just argue to a smaller war with Iran- that seems to be what you are arguing.
Also, the idea that we have "lost momentum" is quite strange. We have never had any big politicians on our side. We have slowed down the proposed Ratner project by an unwavering commitment to democracy, transparency and community activism.
You seem to like a system where our powerful leaders make all the decisions. That's your right, and doubt I will change your mind. But there are lots of us who believe in representative democracy, including Chris Owens.
The other candidates may pretend to be progressives, but by supporting the Ratner proposal, I think they are just sucking up to the corrupt New York political system. That's why I oppose them. That's why I trust Chris to make the right decisions for our country.
I agree with 7:15. Additionally, I agree with some of the previous bloggers about the potential power of Congress Members, even freshmen - even if they are in the minority party.
I think the point here is not whether a congressperson can change anything about the proposal, but that these people have real issues affecting their lives and they will choose a candidate based on them.
Even if false belief that a candidate can do something to stop this project is the case, won't that candidate most likely agree on other, especially similar, issues? And wouldn't that person want to be represented by somebody who reflects their views on critical issues like the future of downtown/central Brooklyn, regardless of their institutional impact?
The dddb people just make it impossible to stand with them. I, like them, oppose the project in its current form, but as others have stated on this blog, there is a lot of institutional support behind it. So instead of sitting down like rational people and discussing ideas to create a project that the whole community, district and borough can be proud of and support, you trash people in the media and in their neighborhoods. I've been to dddb meetings - they are all brownstone belt residents (I live in the brownstone belt but I grew up in crown heights) and you guys are so rabid and volatile, calling ratner names and people that work for him names (so unattractive). You guys won't even admit that sensebrenner's bill is right-winged, too broad and bad for the development of nyc. You guys just have an axe to grind; so many developers are coming in to brooklyn and building condos and coops that the average brooklynite - like me and my family - cannot afford. They build without union workers...and you guys won't even give fcr credit for that.
Also, nicole mentioned the position of 2 of the 3 people she spoke with - they were against the project. But she didn't mention the position of the last guy...did I miss something? This is exactly what I'm talking about; why wouldn't nicole mention the position of the last man? Is it because he supports the project? When are the residents of brooklyn going to get a rational discussion about the atlantic yards project?
Because of this reason, I don't know if I can stomach voting for owens. To me, he has been as volatile as dddb and I don't think I want that in my elected official. They are supposed to have more sense than residents who are too close to a project to see the forest through the trees.
I expect the dddb people to begin trashing me on this blog, they will forget that I said that I am against the project as it stands, which will just further prove my point because you can't speak with them, so I'm not going to even respond. Happy blogging!
The dddb people just make it impossible to stand with them. I, like them, oppose the project in its current form, but as others have stated on this blog, there is a lot of institutional support behind it. So instead of sitting down like rational people and discussing ideas to create a project that the whole community, district and borough can be proud of and support, you trash people in the media and in their neighborhoods. I've been to dddb meetings - they are all brownstone belt residents (I live in the brownstone belt but I grew up in crown heights) and you guys are so rabid and volatile, calling ratner names and people that work for him names (so unattractive). You guys won't even admit that sensebrenner's bill is right-winged, too broad and bad for the development of nyc. You guys just have an axe to grind; so many developers are coming in to brooklyn and building condos and coops that the average brooklynite - like me and my family - cannot afford. They build without union workers...and you guys won't even give fcr credit for that.
Also, nicole mentioned the position of 2 of the 3 people she spoke with - they were against the project. But she didn't mention the position of the last guy...did I miss something? This is exactly what I'm talking about; why wouldn't nicole mention the position of the last man? Is it because he supports the project? When are the residents of brooklyn going to get a rational discussion about the atlantic yards project?
Because of this reason, I don't know if I can stomach voting for owens. To me, he has been as volatile as dddb and I don't think I want that in my elected official. They are supposed to have more sense than residents who are too close to a project to see the forest through the trees.
I expect the dddb people to begin trashing me on this blog, they will forget that I said that I am against the project as it stands, which will just further prove my point because you can't speak with them, so I'm not going to even respond. Happy blogging!
I know in the blog-O-sphere, DDDb is considered irrational and impossible to talk to. As someone who actively works with DDDb, I have to say that my experience is that we own the streets and that the Ratner supporters are hiding in their BUILD offices.
I am intent on keeping an open dialogue, so 6:45 if you live the neighborhood you have something to vent about DDDb, contact me and I'll try to explain our position. Email me at BrooklynWiki@gmail.com.
I will open the floodgates of email to anyone who lives in Prospect Heights or Crown Heights. But I'm glad to explain my support of Chris Owens to anyone who lives in the 11th.
I promote an extremely "volatile" idea, to use your word: No taxation without representation. That used to be a conservative cry, but it should be pretty universal. If we are going to subsidize corporate welfare queens, then we should at least have some democratic control over where and how the money is being spent.
I know in the blog-O-sphere, DDDb is considered irrational and impossible to talk to. As someone who actively works with DDDb, I have to say that my experience is that we own the streets and that the Ratner supporters are hiding in their BUILD offices.
I am intent on keeping an open dialogue, so 6:45 if you live the neighborhood you have something to vent about DDDb, contact me and I'll try to explain our position. Email me at BrooklynWiki@gmail.com.
I will open the floodgates of email to anyone who lives in Prospect Heights or Crown Heights. But I'm glad to explain my support of Chris Owens to anyone who lives in the 11th.
I promote an extremely "volatile" idea, to use your word: No taxation without representation. That used to be a conservative cry, but it should be pretty universal. If we are going to subsidize corporate welfare queens, then we should at least have some democratic control over where and how the money is being spent.
"If we are going to subsidize corporate welfare queens, then we should at least have some democratic control over where and how the money is being spent."
comments like this are the same kind that got your "spokesperson" goldstein in trouble...
I opened the floodgate, and didn't get a trickle. It looks like none of the people who complain about the pro-democracy/anti-Ratner movement bothered to continue an actual dialogue.
This is an issue about "corporate welfare queens." If saying that gets me in trouble, then I'm up for trouble. We should not give our money to favored government contractors without oversight, period.