ribbon-cutting ceremony. As for local support of. As for local support of citizens, there is no evidence of abundant support.

DDDB over 7 years raised about $1.8 million for its legal fund from more than 6,000 individual donors with a median donation of about $60. Dozens of civic groups signed on as coalition participants. That is a clear sign of public disenchantment with the project. The opponents are anti-development. No. The lead opposing group is called Develop Dont Destroy for a reason. It encouraged competitive bidding for the airspace over the MTA railyards, finding architects and community leaders to create an alternative plan, called the UNITY Plan, which formed the basis of Extell Development Companys viable competitive proposal to the MTA. The project would have been built long ago if not for the opponents. No. The plan was never financially feasible (per a 2004 economic analysis); market conditions stopped many major developments at the same time. FCRC says it was always market-driven, despite the enormous subsidies. Additionally, if the project hadnt been dependent on eminent domain and a complete override of all NYC zoning regulations, there would have been no meaningful opposition.

The Nets are Brooklyns team. No. Bruce Ratner, cash-starved by the recession, sold 80% of the team and 45% of the arena to a Russian billionaire, Mikhail Prokhorov. Early investors have very small stakes, including Jay-Z, who now only owns .067% of the team. A lot of people in the footprint profited handsomely from being bought out. No. First of all, most renters received no compensation. For those owners who got more than they paid for their properties, they were FORCED out, either under the threat of eminent domain or through the process itself; the market had increased their properties values anyway. Note that city and state taxpayers picked up a large portion of the tab. If the New York media is not entirely critical of the Atlantic Yards development, it must be OK. No. The New York Times editorial pages have gone easy on Ratner in part because they are development partners in the Timess new headquarters. The Daily News has published huge advertising sections for FCRC and purchased naming rights to the plaza. And none of the three daily editorial pages have ever met a development they didnt like.

Boondoggle Basics
USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN ON BEHALF OF A PRIVATE DEVELOPER LARGE-SCALE DEVELOPMENT IN A LOW-RISE, RESIDENTIAL AREA LACK OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT OVERRIDING ALL LOCAL ZONING LACK OF LOCAL POLITICAL SUPPORT LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN PROCESS CORPORATE WELFARE AT ITS WORST NET LOSS TO TAXPAYERS

Barclays Center/Atlantic Yards

The Atlantic Yards development, which is a 22-acre site on which only the Barclays Center arena has been built as of Sept. 2012, is a boondoggle of historic proportions. The largest single-source development in NYC history subsidized to the hilt and dependent on eminent domain and the override of all local zoningdid not have to face a vote by a single elected official in NYC or in Albany. Many citizens recognize that there is an established pattern across our country of private developers and pro sports franchise owners conning governments into somehow paying for arenas and stadiumsand want to stop this kind of expensive, massive loss from happening ever again. The developer, Forest City Ratner Companies (FCRC), and its CEO, Bruce Ratner, used political and personal connections and an army of lobbyists to ensure that Empire State Development (ESD), a quasi-public state authority with little accountability, would be the official developer, providing protection from lawsuits and scorn by presenting the image of a non-profit, government project. Among other things, these maneuvers allowed FCRC to acquire inhabited private property for its private development in a residential area through the states use of eminent domain, something that many people feel is unconstitutional. This abuse of eminent domain, compounded by the giveaway of more than a billion dollars in public subsidies and tax breaks (a net loss to the taxpayers), is what makes this a boondoggle, underlined by the fact that the original promises by FCRC on the creation of jobs and affordable housing seem to have been empty. Develop Dont Destroy Brooklyn feels strongly that is important for all citizens to know the facts in order to avoid such boondoggles in the future.

All of the sources for these facts are links found on Develop Dont Destroy Brooklyns website: DDDB.net For more information, please visit these other websites: atlanticyardsreport.com nolandgrab.org brooklynspeaks.net aycrimescene.com

BOONDOGGLE BASICS: CLAIMS VS. REALITY

FCRC claimed that Atlantic Yards would create 10,000 permanent jobs and 17,000 construction jobs. Did they deliver on their promises? No. FCRC itself has announced a mere 105 full-time jobs at the arena. No jobgenerating office buildings or a hotel are planned. Most of the businesses involved so far are not local but are national chains. And the number of on-site construction jobs has rarely reached past 700. FCRC and Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz stressed delivery of affordable housing as a major justification for the project. Is it? No. No housingnot one unithas been built as of the arena opening, Sept. 2012; only 9 family-sized units for low-income renters are planned for the first residential building (of 15 planned towers), which has not yet been started. FCRC initially claimed it would break ground in the fourth quarter of 2009. This is a public project (Mayor Bloomberg and Marty Markowitz have appeared at major announcements and events). No. Its complicated. Essentially, the Barclays Center is a privately managed arena that Forest City Ratner built and now leases for $1 per year. Yet FCRC claims that the footprint is private property and collects the naming rights fees from Barclays.

The footprint, the land on which the arena has been, and the rest of the Atlantic Yards development will be built, was blighted. No. 334 residents in 171 homes were displaced. Many of the homes that the state seized and handed over to FCRC were condos and co-ops that had recently sold for between $500,000 and $1,000,000. Others housed long-time low- and middle-income residents, 33 successful businesses and 235 jobs. Abutting neighborhoods include historic districts and thriving retail streets such as Vanderbilt Avenue, subjects of countless articles over the past years about the Brooklyn renaissance. The entire development is being built over old, decrepit railyards. No. Only 8.5 of the footprints 22 acres are over railyards. An alternative development proposal, the UNITY plan (www. unityplan.org), envisioned a complete project using only the air rights over the railyards and no eminent domain. The arena itself now sits on top of a former thriving block of residences and businesses, a city street, and a portion of the formerly active railyard. The Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) sold its air rights over the railyards at a huge profit. No. They sold at a huge discount. In an underpublicized and contrived bidding process, FCRC faced only one competitor: Extell Development Company. Though Extell outbid FCRC at $150 million to $50 million, the MTA elect-

ed to negotiate exclusively with FCRC. FCRC revised its bid to $100 million and the MTA accepted it. The MTA had appraised the rights at $214 Million. The arena is located in Downtown Brooklyn. No. Most locals say it is in Prospect Heights, a thriving brownstone neighborhood. The site borders the low-rise, residential neighborhoods of Park Slope, Fort Greene, and Boerum Hill all thriving, historic places. Only the sites northwest tipthe plazaabuts downtown Brooklyn. Atlantic Yards is the result of urban planning. No. The total opposite is true: The developer and the ESD completely sidestepped New York Citys normal land use review process. No local oversight was allowed. Even Mayor Bloombergs former deputy mayor for development Doctoroff said he regretted that Atlantic Yards avoided the citys Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULRUP). The City Planning Department played no meaningful role in the project. Forest City Ratner won several dozen lawsuits against the project. No. They have often claimed a number that clearly includes various individual motions. There were six suits by DDDB and others, and FCRC lost the last one in which they were accused of lying about and hiding the real build-out timetable of 25 years (the project was approved

based on a 10-year buildout). Extending the timetable to 25 years diminishes most of the alleged benefits; most arenas dont even last more than 30 years. Atlantic Yards is privately financed (Mayor Bloomberg is fond of saying so). No. New York City allocated the project a direct cash subsidy of $205 million, while New York State contributed a direct cash subsidy of $100 million. Ratner also pays no property tax on the project site. Including tax breaks on materials, bonding, and below-market value public land, it has been estimated that all subsidies for the entire project amount to roughly $2 billion. This project is an economic engine and a boost to New York Citys economy. No. The Citys Independent Budget Office (IBO) has calculated that the arena alone will be a net LOSS to the city of at least $40 million and as much as $220 million; when all subsidies are totaled, FCRC will save $726 million on the construction of the arena, nearly its full cost. This includes such gifts as a sales-tax exemption on construction materials and a waiver of property taxes. The arena jobs are almost entirely low-wage, part-time positions. Atlantic Yards and the arena have abundant local support. No. Most of the elected officials representing the project site and the surrounding areas have been opposed to or deeply critical of the project and were not at the