CB9M Chairman's Blog 1 January 2004 - 31 December 2007

Activists Vow to Continue Fight Against University Expansion

2008-01-22T14:17:00.000-05:00

Activists Vow to Continue Fight Against University Expansion
By Mary Kohlmann
PUBLISHED JANUARY 22

Despite the blow that the New York City Council’s approval of Columbia’s rezoning plan represents for those who challenge the University, activists have not given up hope.

Many members of Coalition to Preserve Community, an activist group that opposes the University’s expansion plan, and Columbia’s Student Coalition on Expansion and Gentrification view the decision as a mere roadblock, and are developing strategies for everything from political action to physical opposition.

“That approval is maybe celebrated in Low Library, but it is a completely illusory victory,” CPC member Tom Kappner, CC ’66, said.

In the past, the two groups have held protests and teach-ins. Over the coming months, they plan to inform the community further about the project and hope to influence the upcoming state review of Columbia’s plans. The state has the power to use eminent domain to transfer private commercial properties to Columbia.

“We have a two-pronged approach,” CPC leader Tom DeMott, CC ’80, said. “One is to keep informing the local community about the situation now that Columbia has gotten the plan approved. Two is to get that message out to the Columbia community.”SCEG member Victoria Ruiz, CC ’09, said there would be petitioning, busing to meetings, and protests.

Plans are also being considered to obstruct the construction physically. “We’ve all said that we’ll stand outside in front of the bulldozers,” DeMott said.

Other possible tactics are financial. CPC members have suggested contacting potential donors to the expansion and discouraging their participation. “Many Columbia alumni, thank God, see that this is not what they want their University to be,” Kappner said.

Columbia Senior Executive Vice President Robert Kasdin disagreed, citing the University’s “deep ties” with the local community. “To the contrary,” he said, “University alumni are excited at the opportunities Manhattanville makes available for generations to come.

“There is widespread support for Columbia’s initiative as evidenced by the strong support of elected officials of Harlem and Washington Heights,” Kasdin added.

Most organizers do not consider formal discussion with the University useful. In November 2007, students on a hunger strike demanded that the University revoke its 197-c plan, but, upon meeting with administrators involved with the expansion, complained that they dismissed concerns.

Ruiz, who was one of the hunger strikers, said that meetings with administrators are only “symbolic. ... They don’t really result in meaningful information for either side.”

Activists are dissatisfied with their elected officials who supported the expansion. “Personally, I think that Robert Jackson and Scott Stringer—they’re finished in this community,” Kappner said. “If they stood for election today they wouldn’t have the votes to stay in office.”

But the frustration with local elected officials is not unanimous in the community, and in the wake of the 197-c vote, running for office on an anti-expansion platform is not constructive, as former CB9 chair Jordi Reyes-Montblanc pointed out.

“The trouble is, it’s done, it’s finished,” he said. “I don’t like to waste my time on things that are finished.” Reyes-Montblanc has said he will run for City Council in 2009 for District 7, which comprises Manhattanville and Hamilton Heights.

Activists against Columbia’s plan have singled out New York State senator Bill Perkins as one of the only elected officials who supports them.

“I appreciate their opposition to the project,” Perkins said of the CPC, “And I have to have some conversations with them before I can say exactly how we’ll be involved. We support the cause.”
CB9 chair Pat Jones distinguished the board’s position from that of CPC, adding, “We can be supportive of ensuring that community members are safe and that their needs are met.”

mary.kohlmann@columbiaspectator.com

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/node/28687

Negotiations force Columbia to increase bid

2008-01-15T15:31:00.001-05:00

YALE DAILY NEWS

Negotiations force Columbia to increase bid
To win support for expansion from West Harlem community, university coughs up extra $50M

Raymond Carlson
Staff Reporter
Published Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Before Columbia University could break new ground on its planned expansion in West Harlem, the university had to meet the needs of the local community — to the tune of $150 million.
Prior to receiving the City Council’s approval for its expansion on Dec. 19, Columbia had to increase its initial monetary offer for the community-benefits package fivefold, from $30 million to $150 million, the News has learned. Negotiating the final figure required many months of dialogue between the university and community leaders in the West Harlem Local Development Corporation — but a decision to add the last $50 million of the buyout was made in only one night.

The ultimate $150-million sum — part of a community-benefit agreement — was settled on the night of Dec. 18, the day before the City Council was set to vote on the zoning proposal, which was seen as a go-ahead for Columbia’s expansion project. Going into negotiations that evening, the university had offered only $100 million. But after working with Columbia President Lee Bollinger and Senior Executive Vice President Robert Casden, community members bargained that number up to $150 million.

Citing the ongoing nature of the negotiations — which were confirmed by several city officials and university affiliates — Columbia officials declined to comment.

In a saga that may foreshadow Yale’s own expansion efforts down the road, Columbia has been pushing since 2003 for the construction of a 17-acre expansion in a part of West Harlem known as Manhattanville, just a few blocks from its main campus in Morningside Heights. Prior to receiving approval from the City Council, the university focused on winning support from members of the local community.

Locals, brought up in a history of frosty relations with the university, initially resisted the plan.

Columbia’s expansion would displace some residents, and there were concerns that it would completely change the makeup of the neighborhood, explained Susan Russell, chief of staff for City Council Member Robert Jackson, who represents most of the area into which Columbia plans to expand.

“The atmosphere around this possible development wasn’t a good one — the community was incensed about it,” she said.

Over time, local residents warmed to the expansion plan, thanks to efforts by the university to engage in dialogue with the community, said Warren Whitlock, Columbia’s director of construction coordination.

Still, the community’s local government representatives in Community Board 9 — which includes Morningside Heights, Manhattanville and Hamilton Heights — had to claim an active role in the negotiations to ensure their constituents’ views were heard.

In order to increase direct communication between the community and Columbia, in the summer of 2005 the board passed a resolution creating a local development corporation, the LDC. The LDC was incorporated in either April or May of 2006, Russell said.

Because the corporation — which has 28 seats — includes nine locally elected officials, including members of Community Board 9, the corporation became the key link between the local community and Columbia throughout the expansion process.

“A community board is not empowered to negotiate,” said Sarah Morgridge, Jackson’s executive assistant. “The successor community voice was the West Harlem Local Development Corporation.”

Over the ensuing months, the LDC focused on a wide array of issues important to local residents — committees were formed to speak up for community members on transportation, the environment, housing and other issues surrounding the expansion.

One of the most important functions of the board was to negotiate the sum of money to be provided to the community through the community-benefit agreement.

Council member Jackson worked tirelessly to ensure that local residents were happy with the plan, and the LDC proved a key connection between the community and the university, Russell said.

Theodore Kovaleff, a former dean of Columbia Law School and former six-time chair of the LDC, said he believed New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said the Council needed to vote on the expansion by Dec. 19 in order to accommodate the Council’s winter break.

On the night of Dec. 18, final negotiations for the community-benefit agreement were underway. On that evening, the LDC’s executive committee told LDC members it had been able to negotiate an increase in the size of the buyout of over 225 percent.

“Columbia had first come up with an offer of about $30 million in terms of [the community benefits package],” Kovaleff said. “The executive committee did a significant amount of negotiations — they got Columbia up to $100 [million].”

At that stage, members of the LDC felt that the community should receive more money for the displacement the expansion would cause, he said. The city had also offered to provide funding to the community through the agreement, but the LDC risked pushing too far and not obtaining as much money as it could from the city. Kovaleff likened the situation to Russian roulette.

“Had we not come to an agreement, there was the potential that we would have ended up shortchanging our community,” he said.

It was then, after several hours of discussions, that Columbia agreed to pay $150 million to the community through a memorandum of understanding.

The following day, when the City Council voted on the expansion, the stretch of time during which the funds would be allocated remained unsettled, Kovaleff said. That morning, university and community negotiators agreed to cut down that timespan, he said.

Still, a few local residents believe the negotiation process has not been open enough to community members, said Tom DeMott, a former member of the FDC and leader of the Coalition to Preserve Community, which opposes Columbia’s expansion.

Russell said the CCU tried to dominate community dialogue on the expansion. The $150 million could have a significant positive impact on the area, she said.

“We’ve given ourselves money with which the community can do anything,” Russell said.
The money has the potential to the change the lives of local residents for generations, allowing them to become “totally self-sufficient” and to find their own American dream, she said.

Still, Maritta Dunn, a member of the LDC, said both groups went into the negotiation process hoping for different outcomes, and it was necessary for the two groups to settle on a figure that fit between each of their expectations.

“We at least were able to reach something that was acceptable,” she said. “I don’t think it was what they wanted. I don’t think it was what we wanted.”

http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/22932

Columbia Expansion Approved In NYC

2007-12-31T20:29:00.000-05:00

Columbia Expansion Approved In NYC
Published On Thursday, January 03, 2008 10:03 PM
By VIDYA B. VISWANATHAN
Crimson Staff Writer
:

Columbia University has won approval for a $7 billion, 25-year expansion of its Manhattan campus just as Harvard enters the first phase of its even more ambitious plan to enlarge the University’s presence in Allston.

The Columbia plan, approved by the New York City Council last month, offers ammunition to local critics who say that Harvard isn’t doing enough to provide benefits to the Allston community that will be affected by the expansion.

As part of a deal to build a state-of-the-art, four-building science complex in Allston, Harvard has pledged $25 million in benefits to the community. Meanwhile, Columbia’s entire 25-year plan is accompanied by a $150 million community benefits agreement including a new Columbia-assisted public secondary school.

“In the Columbia plan, there is no question of public or private—it is very clearly public space that is much more welcome to use,” said Harry Mattison, a member of the Harvard-Allston Task Force, which was created by Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

In Harvard’s plan, Mattison said, “you put the walls on the outside and keep the nice grassy courtyard for people that are part of really only the Harvard community.”

Harvard officials say they are taking the Allston community’s concerns seriously. “There have been more than 70 community meetings both on the master plan and on the first science buildings,” said Lauren Marshall, a Harvard spokeswoman. “All of that discussion and dialogue goes to inform our planning as projects shape.”

Columbia’s project will rezone part of the Manhattanville manufacturing zone in West Harlem into a 17-acre addition to the university’s main campus. Plans call for it to include more than 6.8 million square feet of space for education, research, and cultural facilities.

Harvard’s Allston expansion, by comparison, will cover about 200 acres of Allston. “Universities all over America are now finding they have to plan expansion and growth, particularly in science,” said Kathy A. Spiegelman, Harvard’s chief Allston planner.

Despite its large benefits package, Columbia has also faced opposition from community groups as it lobbied New York for approval of its plan. Columbia says it will not use the power of eminent domain on residential properties but reserves the right to request the state to consider using eminent domain on commercial properties.

Mattison claimed that Columbia is making a more tangible investment in the community than Harvard is in its expansion. He said that the secondary school to be built by Columbia will enroll an equal number of children who live in the community and children whose parents are affiliated with Columbia. He also pointed out that Columbia’s Web site offers an explanation of the expansion in both English and Spanish, while Harvard’s does not. According to a 2007 survey by the Boston Public Health Commission, 8.5 percent of Allston/Brighton residents speak Spanish at home.

—Staff writer Vidya B. Viswanathan can be reached at viswanat@fas.harvard.edu.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=521447

The Moylan Tavern

2007-12-30T12:29:00.000-05:00

The City

F. Y. I.
Going Up?
By MICHAEL POLLAK
Published: December 30, 2007

George Drank Here

Q. George Carlin used to star in a television show set in a Manhattan bar called the Moylan Tavern. Was it real?

A. Yes, though it was a memory.

The Moylan Tavern, on Broadway between La Salle Street and Tiemann Place in Morningside Heights, was torn down several decades ago. Its name was kept alive on “The George Carlin Show,” a sitcom that ran in 1994 and 1995 on Fox. Mr. Carlin played George O’Grady, a sarcastic Irish-American cabdriver who hung out there with other misfits.

Mr. Carlin, who grew up on West 121st Street, spent a lot of time in the real Moylan Tavern.
Maitland McDonagh, a granddaughter of the bar’s founders, remembers some things about the tavern’s past. Her grandparents Winifred Tierney McDonagh (1899-2004) of County Clare and Francis McDonagh of County Sligo came to the United States in the 1920s, married and later opened the tavern, naming it after Moylan Green, a park across the street.

“When my grandfather died in 1962, my grandmother decided she didn’t want to run a bar alone and sold it, I believe to a bartender who’d worked there for years,” Ms. McDonagh wrote in an e-mail message. It “limped on as a real old-man bar” until the 1970s and then closed, she added.

The General Grant Houses, a public project, replaced Moylan Green.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/nyregion/thecity/30fyi.html

Preparations Begin for Mansion Move in Harlem

2007-12-28T16:52:00.000-05:00

Preparations Begin for Mansion Move in Harlem
Friday, December 28, 2007, by Lockhart

Preparations Begin for Mansion Move in Harlem
Friday, December 28, 2007, by Lockhart

The Friends of St. Nicholas Park (on the Hamilton Heights/Manhattanville border) email, "Should be interesting cutting a colonial home in half and moving it across the street." Uh, yeah? The move won't happen until this spring—and the resuscitated house won't open to the public until 2009—but it's not too soon to start getting excited about this. Right? (Okay, maybe.) They've just fenced off the area of the park where the house will move, and groundbreaking is slated for January 11. · Preparations for Hamilton Grange Move Begin [Friends of St. Nicholas Park]

Posted in Manhattan: Harlem/Morningside Heights, Manhattan: Inwood/Washington Heights, Real Estate Miscellany

Comments (7 extant)

Zach
Hasn't that house already been moved about five times?

Comment #1, left at 12/28/07 04:09 PM.
Zach's stats. Zach: 19 comments, 0 followers, 0 ignores.

Larry
Why would they intentionally move it into Harlem?

Comment #2, left at 12/28/07 04:24 PM.
Larry's stats. Larry: 10 comments, 0 followers, 0 ignores.
guest
It already is in Harlem. It's being moved, basically, across the street.

Comment #3, left at 12/28/07 04:27 PM.

guest
The house was moved once already - from it's original site in Harlem ("Hamilton Heights" to be exact) a few blocks from where it sits now. Hamilton owned the whole area, and it's new home in St. Nich park is actually part of his original estate.
Comment #4, left at 12/28/07 08:52 PM.

guest
It's about time this landmark had some breathing room. Congrats!
Comment #5, left at 12:28 AM.

guest

The park itself is actually full of historical sites. (I guess that is where the Friend's call it "Harlem's Historic Green." The north part where the Grange will be moving to is part of Hamilton's original estate. The southern part contains the "Point of Rocks" where Washington stood his ground over British troops before finally retreating upstate. I believe a monument to this event is in the planning stages as well.
Comment #6, left at 11:12 AM.

Reysmont
True enough, the Hamilton Grange was moved once before and when moved to St. Nicholas it will still be within the original land owned by Alexander Hamilton.

St. Nicholas Park is located within Hamilton Heights and on the border of WestSide Harlem and Central Harlem two disticnt and separate communities.

There is a great disconformity with the move as National Parks made agreements with the Community 1i 1995 regarding the relocation and the use of the vacated site and now are claiming not to have the funds to fulfill the 1995 Agreement and the orientation of the grange house within St. Nicholas is not as originally agreed and many community leaders are in disagreement with National Parks on that issue as well.

The 1995 agreement permitted the transfer of the St. Nicholas Park land from the City to the Federal Government for the relocation of the Grange.

Community Board 9 which covers all of WestSide Harlem has taken these issue with Congressman Charles B. Rangel who originally brokered the arrangement between National Parks and the Community and funded the project.

WestSide Harlem encompasess the three historical neighborhoods of Morningside Heghts, Manhattanville and Hamilton Heights.

Sugar Hill, Vinegar Hill and Carmanville are sub-neighborhoods of Hamilton Heights.
Cathedral Heights and University Heights are sub-neighbohoods of Morningside Heights.
Manhattanville is also usually referred to as West Harlem.
Comment #7, left at 04:31 PM.
Reysmont's stats.

Reysmont
By the way I would not call the Grange House a Mansion even by today's standards and was most definitely not a Mansion when Alexander Hamilton and his wife lived in it in the late 1790's early 1800's. It was a confortable farm (grange) house.
Comment #8, left at 05:03 PM.
Reysmont's stats. Reysmont: 2 comments, 0 followers, 0 ignores.

guest
Reysmont - what disconformity are you talking about? The whole community is excited about this project. The orientation debate is ridiculous. It has taken 17 years to get to this place and all you want to do is stop it. Congressman Rangel has fought hard to secure the funds to move this house. Its current place is beyond unacceptable. But you would rather stall this progress still than move it into an open area that it deserves. Unbelievable. As for the promises made in 1995 - THAT WAS 17 YEARS AGO. Things change - like National Parks budgets.

The empty lot (so small it actually should be left vacant) should be a Hamilton Historic visitor and education center if anything.

If you are complaining about affordable housing - I can list you dozens of larger lots owned by churches that refuse to develop the land and rather leave it vacant.

Get real - be appreciative that we have someone like Charlie Rangel who finally has funded a plan to respect one of this country's founding fathers. And for once be happy about a positive thing in Harlem!
Comment #9, left at 12/29/07 09:52 PM.

getridoftheprojects
when will they put some of the massive Harlem projects on wheels and move them away from the area???
That would be a story!!!!
Comment #10, left at 12/31/07 12:56 PM.

getridoftheprojects's stats. getridoftheprojects: 13 comments, 0 followers, 0 ignores.

Reysmont
Re Comment #9 - Dear Sir or Madam you must live a very sheltered life.

CB9M and I in particular, are very appreciative and proud of our Congreesman, Chairman Rangel.

The fact is that an agreement for a consideration was made signed seal and delivered, that makes it a contract and that contract between the community and National Parks is being broken by National Parks 13 years after it was made regardless of the funding obtained by Chairman Rangel.

What is objectionable is that breach that will leave a hole in the ground on Convent Avenue and as it belongs to the Federal Government the most that will happen is that it be seeded for a lawn without further care or attention.

Perhaps some developer will get that piece of land and the empty lost next to it and erect a towner on Convent Avenue for housing the homeless or turne it into another Condo take your pick.

I personally agree that the orientation of the house in the Park is a ridiculous fight not worth the effort, but those people who feel that way have a right to express their opinions and be heard and hopefully reason will prevail.

I respect your opinion but obviously in this case you are sorely short of information.
Comment #11, left at 12:52 PM.
Reysmont's stats

http://curbed.com/archives/2007/12/28/preparations_begin_for_mansion_move_in_harlem.php

2007-12-27T17:18:00.000-05:00

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Preparations for Hamilton Grange Move Begin
A chain link fence (photos below) has been installed around the construction perimeter of the park where the Hamilton Grange will be moved into St. Nicholas Park. Preparations of the area include taking down the large trees where the house will eventually be reconstructed. Ground breaking on the area for the foundation may take place on Alexander Hamilton's Birthday - January 11th.

The National Parks Service presented their plans to the Friends and Manhattan Borough Parks Commissioner William Castro during a meeting in November and then once again during a public meeting in Shepard Hall at City College.

For the move, the Grange will be cut in half and transported from its current spot on Convent Avenue (between 141st and 142nd streets) to the area of St. Nicholas Park within the boundaries of Hamilton's original estate land.

The move will take place along Hamilton Terrace and across 141st street into St. Nicholas Park.

The house move is expected to take place in the spring of 2008. Street closures are expected along Convent, Hamilton Terrance and West 141st Street for 1-2 days. The house will be transported by backing it out of its current location down to Hamilton Terrace (where a few trees might need to be removed) and across the street into St. Nicholas Park.

Once the house is moved and secured, a renovation will take place where contractors will rebuild the original porches which had to be removed in order to fit the house in its current space (between St. Luke's Church and an Apartment Building).

Landscaping around the Grange's new home will include tree plantings, a stone wall and paths. The Grange will have security detail during the day and possible video monitoring during the evening hours.

Above is a rendering of the placement of the Grange in the park. (Click to make the image larger) On the right side is the Grove School of Engineering at CCNY.

The house is expected to open to the public in the Spring of 2009.

The Friends are hard at work trying to obtain some renderings to place on this site. Please check back for updates in the next few months. For up to date photos of the Grange's move please check our Hamilton Grange Flickr photo set.
Posted by William_Guffman at 10:24 AM
Labels: Hamilton Grange

3 comments:
Friends of St. Nicholas Park said...
Please leave a question or comment on the Grange by filling out the comment box. During the Grange's move and reconstruction we will be fielding questions on this forum. Thank you!
12:32 PM

cadboy said...
Hello FriendsAt this time there is a proposal to "jack up" the house 20 feet and move it in one piece out onto Convent St. I have been given the job to "model' this move on 3D cad for there approval. This computer model will include all of the superstructure built to support the jacks, the rails to roll the house on as it is moved out to the street and the final placement of the house on the moving dollies. I will heep you all up-to-date as we procede.
10:27 AM

Anonymous said...
True enough, the Hamilton Grange was moved once before and when moved to St. Nicholas it will still be within the original land owned by Alexander Hamilton.St. Nicholas Park is located within Hamilton Heights and on the border of WestSide Harlem and Central Harlem two distinct and separate communities.

There is a great disconformity with the move as National Parks made agreements with the Community 1i 1995 regarding the relocation and the use of the vacated site and now are claiming not to have the funds to fulfill the 1995 Agreement and the orientation of the grange house within St. Nicholas is not as originally agreed and many community leaders are in disagreement with National Parks on that issue as well.

The 1995 agreement permitted the transfer of the St. Nicholas Park land from the City to the Federal Government for the relocation of the Grange.Community Board 9 which covers all of WestSide Harlem has taken these issue with Congressman Charles B. Rangel who originally brokered the arrangement between National Parks and the Community and funded the project.

WestSide Harlem encompasess the three historical neighborhoods of Morningside Heghts, Manhattanville and Hamilton Heights.

Sugar Hill, Vinegar Hill and Carmanville are sub-neighborhoods of Hamilton Heights.

Cathedral Heights and University Heights are sub-neighbohoods of Morningside Heights.

Manhattanville is also usually referred to as West Harlem.
4:49 PM

http://stnicholaspark.blogspot.com/2007/12/preparations-for-hamilton-grange-move_27.html

EDC president to succeed Doctoroff

2007-12-27T15:48:00.000-05:00

crain's new york business.com

EDC president to succeed Doctoroff
Robert Lieber, who was seen as a long shot for the post, will become Deputy Mayor for Economic Development on Jan. 8; Daniel Doctoroff resigned earlier this month.
December 27. 2007 3:34PMBy: Anne Michaud

Robert Lieber, president of the city’s Economic Development Corp., has been promoted to Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, succeeding Daniel Doctoroff. Mr. Lieber, who was seen as a long shot for the post because he has been with the city for just a year, begins Jan. 8.

At the same time, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced that some of Mr. Doctoroff’s operational oversight duties will be taken over by Deputy Mayor for Administration Edward Skyler, who will take on the new title of deputy mayor for operations.

“As EDC president, Bob Lieber helped reshape our City with an unprecedented range of projects in all five boroughs,” Mr. Bloomberg said in a statement. “His skills and experience in the private sector and in city government will serve him well as he fills some very big shoes here at City Hall.”

Mr. Doctoroff announced on Dec. 6 that he would leave City Hall after five years to become the president of Bloomberg LP, the financial news and information company founded by the mayor.

Mr. Lieber said he is “extremely thrilled about – and grateful for – the chance to come to City Hall at this exciting moment in the city’s history.”

Among other duties, he will lead the city’s economic development efforts and oversee and coordinate the operations of the Department of City Planning, EDC, the Department of Finance, the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, the Business Integrity Commission, the New York City Off-Track Betting Corporation, the Department of Small Business Services, and the Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting.

Mr. Lieber will also serve as a liaison with city, state and federal and other agencies, including: NYC & Company, the Governors Island Preservation and Education Corp., the Lower Manhattan Development Corp., the Moynihan Station Development Corp., the Hudson Yards Development Corp., and the Coney Island Development Corp.

As deputy mayor, he will continue his work on the development of Moynihan Station, the river-to-river rezoning of 125th Street in Harlem, the transformation of the Kingsbridge Armory, and the development of the site of the former US Naval Homeport in Staten Island.

The mayor appointed Mr. Lieber to head the EDC in January 2007, after he led a team from Lehman Brothers that advised the city, pro bono, in its successful effort to renegotiate the World Trade Center site lease.

At the EDC, Mr. Lieber helped shepherd the Jamaica, Queens, rezoning to completion, in one of the largest rezonings that New York City has ever fashioned. He helped develop the comprehensive rezoning plan for Coney Island and helped steer the city’s efforts to create a new mixed-use neighborhood in Willets Point.

Nat Leventhal, chairman of the Mayor’s Committee on Appointments, is leading the search with Mr. Lieber for a new EDC president.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071227/FREE/933929582/1097/newsletter01

COLUMBIA'S LAND GRAB

2007-12-26T18:12:00.000-05:00

COLUMBIA'S LAND GRAB
By NICK SPRAYREGEN

December 26, 2007 -- LAST week's vote by the City Council to rezone a large area in West Harlem (sometimes referred to as Manhattanville) was a good decision. For too long, this area has been subject to an antiquated designation as a manufacturing zone. Thanks to this rezoning, much of West Harlem can now smartly be revitalized into a vibrant mixed-use community. I believe most of West Harlem and Columbia University are in agreement on this zoning change.

However, the basic disagreement between those parties remains open - that of Columbia's threatened use of eminent domain and forced relocation in order to achieve its stated goal of a total takeover of the entire area.

For more than three years, Columbia has been effectively muscling small property owners, businesses, residents and even churches out of Manhattanville. Its means of coercion: the threat that hangs over every independent's head that he or she will be forced to move in the near future, by the state power of eminent domain - a power that Columbia has always insisted is necessary to its expansion plan.

I've seen first hand how many owners, believing that they had only two choices - sell their property to Columbia now, or risk condemnation and a forced sale at a court-determined rate - have "voluntarily" sold. It's no wonder that the school already owns about 70 percent of the property.

If Columbia is successful with its "we must have it all" expansion plan, the entire West Harlem community from 125th to 134th Streets and from Broadway to 12th Avenue will be wiped out - forever.

A community with a long history - which is actually already experiencing an economic rejuvenation without the "help" of Columbia - will be eliminated. This is wrong.

I expect that the Empire State Development Corp. (the state agency empowered to use eminent domain) will soon declare this part of West Harlem "blighted" - the first necessary step to condemnation. It will do so in order to take private property from one owner and give it to another private owner - Columbia.

For the last three years, in fact, Columbia has given a blank check to the ESDC - agreeing to reimburse the agency for all costs expended in this endeavor. In effect, the state agency has allowed itself to become a "hired gun" for Columbia. This, too, is wrong.

I remain steadfast that Columbia has met its match in me. I will not back down; I'll do everything I can to show the ESDC and the courts why eminent domain should not be used here. If need be, I will litigate this matter all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Columbia needs to learn what every well-adjusted child learns at a very early age: The fact that want something doesn't give you the right to just take it. If Columbia's administrators continue to refuse to voluntarily learn this, then they must be "taught" it.

Nick Sprayregen is the president of Tuck-It-Away Associates, L.P., a West Harlem commercial business.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12262007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/columbias_land_grab_451032.htm

Deals that lead to lost property taxes

2007-12-25T23:34:00.000-05:00

From: MDDWhite
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2007 23:03:15 EST
Subject: Fwd: another way city losing property taxes
To: reysmont@yahoo.com
CC: whitmananne

You are probably aware of this by now but- (Nice to get your own personal coverage like today- Always scary about how much the press will get right though.)

Michael D. D. White

Deals that lead to lost property taxes
Thursday, December 20th 2007, 4:00 AM

New York City lost more than $100 million in property taxes last year because of privately negotiated deals with some of the world's richest companies.

The companies - including behemoths like JPMorgan Chase, Pfizer and NBC - have paid a fraction of their normal property tax bill for years through these little-known deals, commonly called PILOTs (Payments in Lieu of Taxes).

An internal Bloomberg administration report obtained by the Daily News shows:
The giant American International Group paid nothing in PILOTs for fiscal 2007, saving $4.1 million on its annual property tax bill.

The American Stock Exchange, that symbol of the free market, paid a mere $1,070 in PILOTs - far less than a South Bronx homeowner would pay in taxes. The exchange's tax break from City Hall saved it nearly $1.5 million.

JPMorgan Chase paid just $1.9million in PILOTs, 20% of the $9.6 million in property taxes it normally would be assessed.

Most New Yorkers are aware of the outrageous $10 million property tax exemption Madison Square Garden has enjoyed for decades, courtesy of the state Legislature.

So why haven't we heard much about these other tax giveaways in, say, the liberal New York Times? Maybe because the newspaper of record is feeding at the same trough.

The Times paid $219,000 in PILOTs last year for its new printing plant in College Point, Queens, the report said. That's a paltry 13% of the $1.7 million assessed tax on the Times plant.

The undisputed king of PILOTs is real estate developer Bruce Ratner. His Forest City/Ratner firm paid the city $9.7 million last year for half a dozen commercial buildings the company owns in downtown Brooklyn. That sounds like a lot of money - until you realize it's only one-third of the company's actual $26.3 million property tax bill.

That doesn't even count PILOTs that have yet to kick in for Forest City's Atlantic Yards mega-project.

Forest City spokesman Loren Riegelhaupt defended the company's success at landing PILOT subsidies.

"A lot of those buildings in MetroTech were constructed when downtown Brooklyn was not what it was today," Riegelhaupt said. "Many businesses were fleeing to New Jersey in the 1990s, and we were willing to invest in that area when others wouldn't."

City Hall has routinely doled out these PILOT deals for decades, usually as part of a larger incentive package to get companies to stay in town or expand their business.

Government watchdog groups say the absence of uniform standards makes the whole PILOT program open to abuse, because each company gets to negotiate its own private deal. In addition, companies that fail to meet their original job creation promises rarely get penalized.

Until recently, no one knew exactly how much the tax breaks were costing the city. Then in 2005, after city Controller William Thompson released an audit blasting the city's poor monitoring of PILOTs, the City Council passed a law requiring the mayor's office to supply the Council speaker with a report of all PILOT revenues and expenditures.

The News recently obtained copies of those reports, which are sent quarterly from the city Office of Management and Budget to City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

They reveal that some 300 companies and nonprofit groups enjoy long-term PILOT deals. A few of those deals date back to the Koch and Dinkins eras, but most were arranged under Mayors Rudy Giuliani and Bloomberg.

Last year, discounted PILOTs amounted to $107 million in lost revenue to the city, with abatements averaging a whopping 60% per company.

It should come as no surprise that some of the city's powerhouse companies landed the juiciest deals. Just 15 companies enjoyed more than two-thirds of the total tax savings in fiscal 2007, the report shows.

Besides Forest City, AIG, Chase and The Times, top beneficiaries include Morgan Stanley, Bear Stearns, NBC, Pfizer, McGraw-Hill and the Hearst Corp. In NBC's case, the company has received three separate PILOT deals over the past 20 years from Koch, Giuliani and Bloomberg.

jgonzalez@nydailynews.com

"New York City lost more than $100 million in property taxes last year because of privately negotiated deals with some of the world's richest companies.";

Discuss this Article
10 comments so far. Add your comment below!. [Discussion Guidelines]

To post comments, REGISTER or LOG IN

JTDietrich Dec 20, 2007 6:38:39 AM Report Offensive Post I think a lot of cities across the country give property tax breaks to businesses - especially wealthy businesses - because it gives the business an incentive to stay, form jobs, keep talented money-making people local, and ultimately enhances the NY City tax income. If JP Morgan stays in NYC because of a tax break, then the story in NY should be "thank God." But leave it to a liberal city like NY to see it no other way than "tax cuts for the wealthy." You need those jobs to stay local. JT, Fargo, ND

lefty58 Dec 20, 2007 10:30:07 AM Report Offensive Post You have to take what Juan Gonzalez writes with a grain of salt. If it were up to him, we would be all living in a Socialist State like Cuba. Don't know why he is still employed by the NEWS, he's a waste!

Frunkus Dec 20, 2007 10:44:35 AM Report Offensive Post Wow, what a waste of internet space, Juan doesn't factor in that these companies also pay some of the highest rent in the WORLD, these breaks are an incentive to stay in the city instead of taking all their jobs to Jersey. Juan is a idiot.

Kewylewy Dec 20, 2007 12:25:59 PM Report Offensive Post If JTDetrich was paying attention they would know that Jpmorganchase outsourced more than half that company starting two years ago so the People of NY are not reaping the benefits of them staying here. Most of that company is in Ohio and Chicago remember they merged Mr. Dimon is the CEO now. (BAnk One) Alot of long time Chase/Chemical/Jpmorgan/ employees lost their jobs. You see they do not even have 2CMP anymore. Layed off and moved a whole building. Try their site at 1985 Marcus in LI. Whole site wiped out including the cafeteria. So all Jpmorgan in NY is mostly branches. No major operations. Mr. Dimon does not even live here. All they hire is part timers and consultants. How does that help NY?

Desiderata Dec 20, 2007 8:19:19 PM Report Offensive Post Right and they probably lost twice that much in handouts to Illegals

BigJake Dec 20, 2007 8:24:45 PM Report Offensive Post To put the tax breaks in perspective, this columnist or the NYC City Council need to compare the tax dollars lost through PILOTs with the revenues gained through city income taxes on the job either created or saved by the tax breaks. Kewylewy says that half the jobs at one company were outsourced. That does not answer the question about current revenue for NYC from the remaining jobs. Whoever is negotiating these tax breaks should balance them against related revenue streams & factor the amount of the break against the alternative income tax revenue.

marceloalexi Dec 21, 2007 12:25:54 AM Report Offensive Post first of all there is no way in God's green earth that JPMorgan is going to Iowa! The jobs they create are almost worthless to the city because most of their employees live outside the city(NJ,LI,Westchester) These companies make more than enough and should have to pay their fair share. Private homeowners should not be paying more property tax than fortune 500 companies. This is exactly the kind of corporate robbery that will continue to take place with businessmen posing as politicians(Mr. Bloomberg). You look down on socialized Cuba but at least they care enough about their citizens to provide health care. Or maybe you enjoy paying more for the MTA. Give me a break this is wrong. Kudos to Mr. Gonzalez and the news for reporting it and allowing it to be printed!

marceloalexi Dec 21, 2007 12:38:03 AM Report Offensive Post just wondering what does this have to do with immigrants? Or are they also to blame for the Knicks, Jets, and the fare hike. Hey let's go all the way with it and blame everything on illegal immigrants. It's funny how nobody complains about illegals that cook your food in every restaurant you go to. These kind of crooks are the reason you have illegal immigrants. This is an outrage!

Desiderata Dec 21, 2007 7:25:50 AM Report Offensive Post To Marcel... Who the " H " do you think cooked our food before those illegals swam, waded, across the river, or took a truck acrosss the desert ? To listen to you illegal supporters, you'd think we Americans were all sitting on our hands waiting for you to come here and rescue us , from our siestas. Where did the Industrial Revolution start , in Mexico ? Who invented the cotton Gin, Pancho Villa ? Did Vincente' Fox put the first Airplane, or car together ? Get real. They're not undocumented workers. They're illegal. They'r felons and they're breaking the law. They are committing crimes, stealing , causing car accidents, raping , and commiting drug related crimes. Plus bringing in illegal drugs... When they clean up their act, and when Mexico cleans up all the corruption down there, and creates it's own jobs and pays a living wage, we will all live a lot better, and be a lot happier.

mrbeachy Dec 21, 2007 9:35:43 AM Report Offensive Post Kewylewy you are completely correct; I know of 3 jp morgan/chase employees who lost their jobs. One is still unemployed after close to two years;the second went to work at a credit union for much lower pay;and the third is now attending graduate school. If i had my way, unless a company keeps a certain amount of its employees and its operations in nyc,they should lose the tax exemptions and any other deals as well.

Click Here to see all comments or to Report Abuse

http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2007/12/20/2007-12-20_deals_that_lead_to_lost_property_taxes.html

Christmas at Arlington

2007-12-25T07:49:00.000-05:00

Arlington at Christmas

Rest easy, sleep well my brothers.

Know the line has held, your job is done.

Rest easy, sleep well.

Others have taken up where you fell, the line has held.

Peace, peace, and farewell...

Readers may be interested to know that these wreaths -- some 5,000 -- are donated by the Worcester Wreath Co. of Harrington , Maine The owner, Merri ll Worcester, not only provides the wreaths, but covers the trucking expense as well. He's done this since 1992. A wonderful guy.

Also, most years, groups of Maine school kids combine an educational trip to DC with this event to help out. Making this even more remarkable is the fact that Harrington is in one the poorest parts of the state.Please share this with everyone on your address list. You hear too much about the bad things people do. Everyone should hear about this.

'NO SURRENDER': CB9 CHAIR REDEDICATED TO [WEST] HARLEM

2007-12-24T22:19:00.000-05:00

'NO SURRENDER': CB9 CHAIR REDEDICATED TO [West] HARLEM

A colorful leader in West Harlem lost a major development fight last week - but says it only reinvigorated his appetite for public life. > By Sarah N. Lynch

City Limits WEEKLY #619

December 24, 2007

Man in the Middle

At a City Council hearing earlier this month, Community Board 9 Chairman Jordi Reyes-Montblanc and Pat Jones spoke for tempering the impact of Columbia's West Harlem development plans.

Photo by Richard Caplan

Jordi Reyes-Montblanc testifies at a City Council committee hearing on the Columbia proposal in mid-December. Photos by Richard Caplan

West Harlem resident Jordi Reyes-Montblanc was reading a book on the subway headed home one day nearly 20 years ago when he overheard a conversation and was launched into community activism.

“I’ll never forget the date: May 3, 1988,” recalled Reyes-Montblanc, now the chairman of West Harlem’s Community Board 9. “I was in the Number 1 coming up and there were three guys talking … They were talking about a building that they were going to take over as of the first of June.”

He put the conversation behind him as he departed the train, never guessing they were talking about the city-owned building on 136th Street where he, his relatives and other Cuban emigres lived. But when he got home, the same men stood in his lobby announcing the sale of the building to private owners. Reyes-Montblanc felt he had to stop it. And with the help of other tenants, he did.

Thus began Reyes-Montblanc’s immersion in public life. He’s been a member of Community Board 9 – which covers the Morningside Heights, Manhattanville and Hamilton Heights neighborhoods of western Manhattan, from 135th to 155th Street – since 1994. He was elected chairman in 2003, the same year Columbia University announced its plan to redevelop 17 acres of Manhattanville and expand the campus into the predominantly black and Latino neighborhood. CB9 took exception to many aspects of the plan, and the ensuing struggle against the powerful institution landed Reyes-Montblanc squarely in the political spotlight.

On Wednesday, following a series of hearings this fall, City Council approved Columbia’s expansion plan, to the dismay of much of the community. And on Dec. 31, Reyes-Montblanc’s term as chairman ends (though he’ll stay on as a member). With years of fighting the Columbia-led transformation now past, another community board member will become chair – most likely second vice-chair Patricia Jones – and lead the district into years of dealing with it.

Reyes-Montblanc, who was in attendance in Council chambers on Dec. 19 when the members voted – 35 in favor, 5 against (Tony Avella, Charles Barron, Lewis Fidler, Vincent Ignizio, Leticia James), with 6 abstentions (Helen Foster, Eric Gioia, Rosie Mendez, Hiram Monserrate, Peter Vallone Jr., Thomas White Jr.) – does not consider it a defeat.

“You can only be defeated if you surrender, and we never give up,” Reyes-Montblanc said the day after. He’d been considering a run for the City Council seat that Robert Jackson, a Democrat representing Harlem since 2001, will leave empty because of term limits in 2009. But the Council vote made him sure he’ll run.

“I’m starting right now. I have no party affiliation, I have no money, no staff and no volunteers” – but he does have determination to make City Council start heeding the will of community boards. “Once I’m there I’ll be the biggest pain they’ve ever seen in City Council,” Reyes-Montblanc said.

From Cuba to the Columbia campus

In late October, several of CB9’s 49 members arrived at Reyes-Montblanc’s office to preview a video they hoped to show to City Council and eventually air on public access television. The movie, prosaically titled “Community Board 9 Manhattan 197-a Plan,” was the board’s latest offensive in fighting certain elements of Columbia’s rezoning request and touting the alternate vision expressed in its “197-a” plan.

That plan, whose completion Reyes-Montblanc considers a highlight of his chairmanship, lays out recommendations for the district’s future development. In a move some consider paradoxical, Council also approved that on Dec. 19 (though in a modified form).

Tall and burly, the 64-year-old spoke out against Columbia’s plans over the months, publicly criticizing what he considers the university’s “patronizing attitude” toward the community. He fears some aspects of the expansion are incompatible with residents’ vision for the neighborhood, and worries that Columbia will resort to eminent domain to acquire some of the properties in the area. He says he doesn’t want to see residents forced out.

Reyes-Montblanc at City Hall.“I’m looking for reasonable settlement with Columbia,” Reyes-Montblanc said the week before Council’s vote. “I can see lots of benefits of the expansion, but I don’t go into them because I’m not fighting for Columbia. ... I’m fighting for the community, so I have to emphasize the negatives and try to correct those negatives.”

But while he has gone head-to-head with Columbia officials in his capacity as chair, even figures such as Senior Executive Vice President Robert Kasdin, who guides the expansion project, have acknowledged Reyes-Montblanc to be an “effective advocate” for the neighborhood.

Kasdin said in a statement, "Although we have at times disagreed on specific issues, we have shared a love of our community and commitment to its future."

At CB9 and, he hopes, on City Council, Reyes-Montblanc plans to keep up that commitment. While it remains to be seen if he’d even have a chance of winning an election in this predominantly Democratic neighborhood – where Democratic Assemblyman Denny Farrell is favored for the seat – the fact that Council “ignored” CB9, in Reyes-Montblanc’s own description, hasn’t necessarily tarnished his reputation.

“It’s been very good to have Mr. Reyes-Montblanc’s leadership through all this,” Rev. Earl Kooperkamp, rector of St. Mary’s Episcopal Church in Manhattanville, said Thursday. Kooperkamp has been a public Columbia-plan critic, and sat next to Reyes-Montblanc at the Council vote. “Quite frankly, I think he deserves a very long vacation after this. He’s left the community board in a good place.”

“This was never a level playing field,” Kooperkamp said of the battle between community activists and an Ivy League university with a $6 billion endowment. “I’m amazed it went as well as it did.”

Another local pastor, Rev. John L. Scott of Saint John Baptist Church on 152nd Street, who once served on a local police coalition with Reyes-Montblanc, says “He’s brave – you’ve got to be brave when you’ve got such an establishment like Columbia that you have to go up against.”
But Reyes-Montblanc knows a thing or two about fighting.

He fled his native Cuba as a teenager after stray .50-caliber bullets from an anti-Batista rebel attacking a nearby police station riddled his grandmother’s house. He arrived in Miami on a Pan American flight on the morning of July 25, 1958 where he joined his exiled parents. He can still remember watching the executions of people he knew in Cuba on television.

Reyes-Montblanc said he served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the 1960s and then arranged to attend the University of Zaragoza in Spain so he could complete the credits for his bachelor’s degree and pursue another degree in international law. (His distinctive name is Catalan, he says.)

But the 24-year-old never made it to law school. With his trip to Spain six months away, he headed to New York City for a vacation. The price of New York living, however, forced him to get a job and he found work in the mailroom of a shipping company. Within two years, he became a general manager in the division. It was there that he met his wife Kathleen, and today he still works as an international shipping consultant, providing advice to companies on everything from customs and regulatory problems to actually chartering ships.

A little chutzpah

And then came that fateful day in May of 1988. It is a story well-documented in the photo albums Reyes-Montblanc keeps at the building where he still resides on 136th Street, and his eyes light up to tell it. He points to the images depicting his younger self sitting with other tenants around a table as they executed plans to save their building, known as the Saxonia.

The day he found out about the city’s plans, he discovered a city program that allowed tenants' associations to convert their city-owned buildings into cooperatives. Within just four days of the sale announcement, he and the others launched a massive letter-writing campaign and formed an association. "We the Tenants..." his new charter began. The original copy is also in the album, along with photos of older residents who lived there, some of whom are now gone.

The city’s housing department "was in fear of us,” Reyes-Montblanc said. “My eyes were opened at the time. I said a little organization and effort and chutzpah goes a long way.”

In less than a month, he managed to convince the city to sell the building to the tenants. For the next five years, he saw to it that the city performed major repair work on the building before the deal was sealed. When they finally purchased the building on May 7, 1993, the photos in the album get cheerier. They show smiling faces of mostly seniors sitting in a bus the tenants rented to take them down to the city’s housing office for a celebration of their newfound homeownership.

His success led him to form the Housing Development Fund Corporation (HDFC) Council – an advocacy organization which to this day still helps tenants create, organize and manage co-ops. Soon, people in the community were coming to him with housing questions.

“He’s the guru on housing,” says Diane Wilson, a fellow CB9 member who served on the community board’s housing committee with Reyes-Montblanc and frequently comes to him with landlord-tenant questions. “He knows it all …He’s fought in the trenches.”

A voracious reader, Reyes-Montblanc can recite Shakespeare and even the old Castilian lines of the famous Spanish epic poem “El Cid.” His admiration for the adventures of the 11th century Spanish nobleman and conqueror El Cid, a picture of whom hangs in his office, has an echo of sorts in his own life. In his early 30s, he traveled to Arizona with a few friends to search for a hidden treasure of gold which, according to lore, is untouched somewhere inside the Superstition Mountains. During the trip, the trio of men experienced everything from dehydration to getting shot at, possibly by rival treasure hunters.

“We were deep in the desert ... and we were shot at,” he recalled. “I carried an M1 Carbine that belonged to another of the guys who had never used it. I was the only one with experience with firearms, so I shot back.” He and his friends returned to New York empty-handed.

Over the years, between his housing activism, shipping work, and his love of history and literature, Reyes-Montblanc has amassed a wealth of knowledge that impresses many of his friends and acquaintances. He’s known for bombarding people with all kinds of e-mail, whether it pertains to a West Harlem issue or an interesting news story.

“He sends little bits on history,” said Robert J. Titus, who met Reyes-Montblanc more than two decades ago through the shipping business and now works as a ship broker with a small company in Tarrytown. “It’s not the type of e-mails you get from everyone else where all the jokes are passed around.”

Broad interests, knowledge and activism helped Reyes-Montblanc land a recommendation for an appointment to the community board in 1994 by then-City Councilman Stanley Michels. Since then, he’s only taken one year off from public service.

Although the Columbia issue has been the most prominent one during his years as chair, it’s not been the only major development in the district. In 2005, Reyes-Montblanc stood by as Mayor Bloomberg and U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel broke ground on the $18.7 million dollar West Harlem Piers project which will connect West Harlem to the rest of the Manhattan waterfront greenway. That project is now close to completion, Reyes-Montblanc said.

Michel’s former housing specialist, Martin Smith, who today serves as Councilman Robert Jackson’s director of constituency services, has known Reyes-Montblanc since his early days in housing work. More than a decade later, Smith said Reyes-Montblanc’s style has not changed at all.

“He’s just as forceful, aggressive, to some obnoxious, to others, the very strong and clear-minded person he’s always been,” Smith said. “He’s no-nonsense. He’ll tell you exactly what he thinks. You may not like it, but that’s his position and he’ll lay it out in as respectful a way as you’ve earned it.”

“If he’s not feeling you, he will let you have it,” Smith added.

Solo efforts

Throughout the Columbia fight, Smith said Reyes-Montblanc has often found himself in the difficult position of trying to remain neutral and objective while still expressing his concerns about Columbia. At times, that struggle to keep emotions from bubbling over worked against him, with some saying he should have been more forceful, Smith said. But overall, most people appear satisfied with his approach.

“He probably at times could have been a little more lenient with people’s needs to vent. He doesn’t have a lot of patience for hyperbole and bull," he said. “Sometimes I think he could have handled a couple situations a little better, but as a whole in the face of a lot of adversity, he did a pretty damn good job.”

But Reyes-Montblanc’s public involvement has come at the expense of his personal life – a life he keeps to himself. His office in the Saxonia, which is a separate unit from his co-op, does not reveal much of his private life. A few framed proclamations and certificates of appreciation hang on the wall as well as some Christmas lights on permanent display. Since the 1980s, he has commuted between West Harlem and Virginia Beach where his wife and son Jeffrey, 30, reside.

Those trips have become less frequent as the increasing demands of his civic life keep him anchored at his office. He's been married 35 years, but wears no wedding ring. A photo of him with his two grandkids on his lap adorns the screen of the computer where he creates his blog. His wife knows little about his civic activities, he said.

Titus said Reyes-Montblanc first moved to Virginia when his shipping company transferred him, but he later returned to New York after the Virginia office closed. At that point, Reyes-Montblanc and his wife had already purchased a house in Virginia Beach.

“He just stayed up here for the longest time,” Titus said. “He grew to live here, she grew to live there.”

Reyes-Montblanc says he leads a compartmentalized life, and he likes it that way. Even some fellow CB9 members know little of his family life.

“I don’t remember him speaking about his son until the birth of the grandbaby,” recalled Patricia Jones, the up-and-coming chair of the board. “I guess it doesn’t occur to him to tell you [about the family], but with the …first grandson, he was so excited he didn’t want to keep it to himself.”

But spending less time with his family has not been his only sacrifice. His business as a shipping consultant has also suffered.

“Being the chair these four years has cost me dearly,” he said. “People don’t realize the amount of time and effort you have to put into it, and that when you work by yourself and when you depend on one-time-only type of contracts and you are not able to take them, eventually those people … don’t offer you them anymore.”

Forty years after he gave up his ambitions to study law to pursue a shipping career, he has now abandoned shipping for what appears to be his true love – life in the public realm. Between the buildings he’s helped convert to low income co-ops, and the fight to preserve his neighborhood's character, it appears Reyes-Montblanc has made as much of an impression on West Harlem as it has left on him. - Sarah N. Lynch

http://www.citylimits.org/content/articles/viewarticle.cfm?article_id=3465&content_type=1&media_type=3

NB - I thank CityLimits and Sarah Lynch for the beautiful and flattering article, but must clarify a few points:

1. Community District 9 goes from 110th Street to 155th Street from roughly St. Nicholas Ave/Morningside Ave/Manhattan Ave to the Hudson River. Hamilton Heights goes from 135th Street to 155th St. Manhatanville from 135th to 122nd St. and Mornigside Heights from 122nd down to 110th Street.

2. Although the completion of the 197-a Plan was possibly the highest achievement of my 4 terms as Chairman, it was the hard work and dedication of Patricia Jones, Walter South, and so many others, board members and residents like Tom DeMott, Tom Kappner, Ruth Eisenberg, and so many others, that made it possible, I'll take credit for appointing them to the task but the accomplishment is theirs exclusively.

3. The fight for saving The Saxonia for the residents was not mine alone but fully shared my friends, my New York family - so to speak, William and Michael Palma, Cecilia Calderon, Lorraine Latuf, Daniel Paulino, William Morales, Silvi Cevallos, the late Mike Latuf, Alida Palma, my uncle Tito and my aunt Yrma and all of our partners of The Saxonia for their sweat, hard work, confidence, dedication and patience.

4. The opinions of my good friends is biased by ther affection for me and they see more than the reality.

5. The WestSide Harlem community has given me the opportunity to be of some small service and for that I am grateful. My Commitment is to the West Harlem community and my District. I hope that past confidence will translate into efforts to help me get into City Council to represent their interest as best as I might be able to do. - JRM

Cuban Revolution - Yoani Sánchez fights tropical totalitarianism, one blog post at a time

2007-12-24T14:27:00.001-05:00

Cuban Revolution
Yoani Sánchez fights tropical totalitarianism, one blog post at a time.

December 22, 2007; Page A1
Havana, Cuba

On a recent morning, Yoani Sánchez took a deep breath and gathered her nerve for an undercover mission: posting an Internet chronicle about life in Fidel Castro's Cuba.

To get around Cuba's restrictions on Web access, the waif-like 32-year-old posed as a tourist to slip into an Internet cafe in one of the city's luxury hotels, which normally bar Cubans. Dressed in gray surf shorts, T-shirt and lime-green espadrilles, she strode toward a guard at the hotel's threshold and flashed a wide smile. The guard, a towering man with a shaved head, stepped aside.

"I think I'm able to do this because I look so harmless," says Ms. Sánchez, who says she is sometimes mistaken for a teenager. Once inside the cafe, she attached a flash memory drive to the hotel computer and, in quick, intense movements, uploaded her material. Time matters: The $3 she paid for a half-hour is nearly a week's wage for many Cubans.

Ms. Sánchez has done this cloak-and-dagger routine since April, publishing essays that capture the privation, irony and even humor of Cuba's tropical Communism -- "Stalinism with conga drums," as she and her husband jokingly call it. From writing about the book fair that blacklisted her favorite authors to the schoolyard where parents smuggle food to their hungry children, Ms. Sánchez paints an unflinching, and deeply personal, portrait of the Cuban experience.

While there are plenty of bloggers who dish out harsh opinions on Mr. Castro, most do so from the cozy confines of Miami. Ms. Sánchez is one of the few who do so from Havana.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid452319854/bctid1351336536

For seven months, Yoani Sanchez has been publishing an often highly critical blog about Cuba -- from Havana. And her writing has become important for those trying to understand Cuba in Castro's twilight years.

"What makes her so special is that she is fresh, observant and on-the-scene," says Philip Peters, a former Latin America official at the State Department who now studies Cuba at the Lexington Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. "Almost all of the Cuba blogs are written by people who travel there occasionally, or by people who haven't seen the island in 40 years, if ever," he says.

Not only does she write from Cuba, she even signs her name and posts a photo of herself on her Web site. Most Havana bloggers are anonymous. "Once you experience the flavor of saying what you think, of publishing it and signing it with your name, well, there's no turning back," she says. "One of the first things we have to do, a great way to begin to change, is to be more honest about saying what you think."

The problem is, saying what you think in Cuba can be dangerous. In 2002, Cuba imprisoned dozens of journalists who declared themselves dissidents and published criticisms of the regime -- many are still there. Most Cubans are so afraid of being labeled a critic that they are reluctant to utter the words "Fidel Castro" in public. Instead, they silently pantomime stroking a beard when referring to their leader.

Direct Writing

Ms. Sánchez's writing is direct. On Oct. 5, she wrote about Mr. Castro's regular newspaper editorials, which usually focus on international politics rather than the problems of Cuba.
YOANI SANCHEZ ON RISK

"The sensation of losing fear, of risking, is a sensation that is normally irreversible. After you cross certain lines, there is no way back." Read more from the interview with Ms. Sanchez.

"The latest reflections of Fidel Castro have ended my patience," she wrote. "To try to evade or distance oneself from our problems and theorize about things that occurred thousands of kilometers away, or many years ago, is to multiply by zero the demands of a population that is tired, disenchanted and in need today of measures that alleviate its precariousness."

The fact that Ms. Sánchez has avoided jail is a source of great intrigue for global Cuba watchers and the Cuban exile community in Miami. Some experts say it signals new tolerance by Raúl Castro, who has taken over day-to-day leadership from his brother because of Fidel's deteriorating health. Since taking temporary power in July 2006, Raúl Castro has called for an "open debate" on the country's economic policies, and promised agricultural reforms to bolster the food supply. Cuba experts debate whether Raúl's promises suggest a true re-examination of Cuba's economic model, or are simply rhetoric.

Others, especially the exile community, can't quite believe Ms. Sánchez gets away with what she does. They wonder if she is an unwitting dupe -- or a complicit agent -- in a campaign to make Raúl Castro appear more tolerant as he seeks greater foreign aid.

"From the bottom of my heart, I want her blog to be legitimate and be the seed that grows into something in Cuba," says Val Prieto, a 42-year-old Miami-based architect who edits an anti-Castro blog called Babalu. "The reason the exile community is wary is that we've been bamboozled time and time again. You never can tell when it comes to Castro."

There may be a simpler explanation. Some experts say Cuban authorities are mainly concerned about what people on the island think, and since the vast majority of Cubans don't have Internet access, the government is less alarmed by a Web site available primarily to outsiders.

Taken Aback

Ms. Sánchez seems surprised by the debate. "It's funny, but it seems that the only way some people will believe I am authentic is if I am thrown in jail," she says. "I'm not sure I want to provide that kind of proof."

It's easy to see why Ms. Sánchez is such a mystery. In a place known for bombastic gesticulation, she makes her points with subtle wit. She is passionate about Cuban culture, but doesn't care for signature elements like baseball and cigars. Though a critic of the government, she hasn't affiliated with the island's official political opposition. Perhaps most surprising on an island that many risk their lives to flee, she left Cuba in 2002, only to return two years later.

Her blog is called Generación Y (www.desdecuba.com/generaciony). The title refers to a fad for names starting with "Y" that began in the 1960s. Cuba's boxing team, for instance, has members named Yoandry, Yuciel, Yampier and Yordenis. Roughly between 25 and 40 today, people in this generation are the offspring of the revolutionaries. Weaned on Soviet cartoons and Communist slogans about a "luminous future," they came of age amid shortages of food, clothing and soap as the economy crumbled.

This group will play a critical role in forging a new Cuba once Mr. Castro is gone. Many expect a showdown between Ms. Sánchez's broadly disillusioned generation and an older group of hard-liners who will try to keep a version of the Castro model going after he dies. Her writing has become required reading for Cuba experts seeking insight into the psychology of this group. Her blog received a half-million hits in October.

The blog reads like her interior monologue as she goes through her routine in Havana: Collecting the daily ration of bread (one bun per person per day), taking her son to school, and running errands -- often trekking on foot to avoid riding the "camel," a bus pulled by a soot-belching tractor-trailer cab.

Rundown Houses

Walking through the city on a recent day, she became lost in thought looking at graffiti and later at a market stall where oil and vinegar are sold in plastic bags. She noticed growing numbers of canine police on Havana's streets, and concluded crime is rising, though statistics are seldom reported. Away from the brightly painted tourist center of "old Havana," Ms. Sánchez walked along streets where once-impressive homes lie in disrepair. She commented on how few new buildings have been built since the 1959 revolution.

Born at the height of the revolution, she was a "pioneer" -- Cuba's answer to the Scouts -- and recited its pledge: "I am a pioneer for Communism, We will be like Ché."
"The homes in this city speak for themselves," she said. "They are the best example of how things have functioned in reality, despite all the political propaganda."

A recurring feature is her 12-year-old son's school. Recently, he participated in a military shooting exercise there. Her son enjoyed playing soldier, but she was outraged. In another entry, she described how parents congregate at the schoolyard at lunchtime to secretly pass food to their children who don't get enough to eat. She described her sadness at seeing children whose parents who don't turn up and will go hungry.

An Oct. 22 entry talked about how her son's teacher told the class that one student had been secretly designated an informer -- charged with keeping a list of good and bad kids that the teacher could use to mete out punishment.

"So young, and these children experience the paralysis generated by the feeling of being watched," she wrote. "I look around me and confirm that the successive irrigations of paranoia have worked. Our fears are populated by CIA agents and members of the secret police."

Fear and Paranoia

Ms. Sánchez believes fear and paranoia are key elements in the Castro government playbook to stay in power. Fear of Cuba's own secret police and fear of an imminent U.S. invasion are perennials. Fear leads Cubans to restrict what they say and do, Ms. Sánchez says. For instance, while Cuba's hotels and resorts are for tourists only, there is no law that a Cuban citizen can't walk into a hotel and use the Internet cafe. Hotels, however, generally bar Cubans from entering, to avoid running afoul of authorities.

Writing her blog is one way to shed her "internal policeman," Ms. Sánchez says. "I am trying to push the limits, to find the line where the internal limits end and the real limits begin." She thinks more Cubans are pushing nowadays too. Lately, in bread lines and other informal gatherings, she's witnessed Cubans publicly complaining about things like corruption, low wages, or the decaying health system.

She recounts how eight strangers in a pre-1959 taxi began to talk freely of their discontent. But the complicity ended abruptly when the taxi arrived at its destination.

"Perhaps it's just wishful thinking that things are changing that has me noting a certain tendency toward collective catharsis," she wrote on Sept. 30. "Whereas once there were shrugged shoulders and turned faces, I now see fingers pointing out the problems, and mouths emanating inconformity."

The reason people feel more confident about openly complaining is economic, she says. The downturn of the early 1990s forced Cuba to allow some private enterprise, such as letting people open small restaurants in their living rooms or rent out rooms. That, plus cash transfers from Cuban exiles, has made locals less reliant on the government for jobs. A measure of economic independence has brought a measure of political independence, she says.

But there are limits. In a May 22 entry, she recounts how eight strangers in the anonymity of a pre-1959 Chevrolet taxi began to talk freely of their discontent. But the complicity ended abruptly when the taxi arrived at its destination. The passengers departed, ignoring each other and resuming their public silence.

Ms. Sánchez grew up in Havana, the daughter of a railroad worker and a housewife. As a girl, the egalitarian future of economic equity envisioned by the revolutionary Ché Guevara seemed in reach. She was a "pioneer" -- Cuba's answer to the Scouts -- and recited its pledge: "I am a pioneer for Communism, We will be like Ché."

The family was plunged into poverty by the collapse of Cuba's economic sponsor, the Soviet Union. In 1991, Mr. Castro declared a "special period" of drastic reductions in food and other rations. Average daily caloric intake fell by 40%. Eventually, optic neuritis, a rare eye disease caused by poor nutrition, swept the island.

When friends got together during those times, Ms. SÃ¡nchez recalls, a single topic dominated conversation: food. To stave off hunger pangs, Ms. Sánchez gobbled spoonfuls of sugar. Scarcity of soap, shampoo and sanitary napkins added to the trauma for an adolescent becoming aware of her body. Many basics were scarce.

"You wanted to go out, but you had no shoes," she says.

The special period transformed Ms. Sánchez from true believer to cynic. She recalls witnessing her parents fall into despair -- a shared experience for many in her generation.

"It was a deep psychological blow for our parents, because they'd given their best years to the revolution and things weren't as they'd imagined," she says, "My parents suffered the desperation and panic of not being able to give their children enough to eat."

Ms. Sánchez attended one of Cuba's revolutionary rural high schools, created to forge a new generation in the atmosphere of farm life. The school was named for the Socialist Republic of Romania -- even though Romania's socialist government had fallen by the time Ms. SÃ¡nchez arrived in 1990. At school, students hoarded scraps of food under their mattresses, attracting rats to the bunks at night, she says.

Ms. Sánchez says she was eventually admitted to the University of Havana's Faculty of Philology -- the study of language and literature -- where she nurtured a love for Latin American writers. But her thesis topic -- dictatorships in Latin American literature -- caused a scandal. Her academic career ended before it began.

"The thesis wasn't overly critical, but the mere act of defining what a dictatorship is in an academic paper made people really nervous, because the definition was a portrait of Cuba," she says.

She met and fell in love with Reinaldo Escobar, a Cuban journalist nearly three decades her senior. In the 1980s, he was forced out of journalism after trying to publish a few critical articles. He began a new career teaching Spanish to tourists, and developed a network of friends in Germany and Switzerland. Ms. Sánchez and Mr. Escobar had a son in 1995.

In 2002, Ms. SÃ¡nchez obtained government permission to leave and moved to Switzerland, thinking she'd never return. She was later joined by her son and husband. Cuba allows some people to leave the country each year.

But the family decided to return to Cuba in 2004, after Ms. Sánchez's husband, who recently turned 60, had trouble finding work. "It's much easier for someone my age to start over," she says. "I didn't want to condemn him to a life of informal labor at that age, and breaking up the family was unacceptable."

Returning to Cuba was a difficult decision says Ms. Sánchez. What made it possible, she says, is a deep attraction to the beauty of the island and the energy of its people. "I came to some kind of internal understanding that I am going to go back, but I am not going to accept things as they are," she says. "I am going to try to do something."

In addition to publishing her blog, she talks freely about taboo subjects. She tells neighbors that she doesn't vote, a shocking admission in Cuba. She isn't a member of any of Cuba's quasi-compulsory political organizations.

"There are many ways to pretend in Cuba: you can say things that you don't believe, or you can stay quiet about the things you don't like," she says. "I have the tranquility of being able to look at my son and he knows that I don't fake it."

At the same time, she tries not to cross a line that will give the government a reason to shut her blog down. She uses only public Internet sites, instead of trying to set up an illegal Internet link from home, as some Cubans do. The family lives on between $20 and $60 a month, she says, earned from working with tourists. She confines her writing to the Web. Critiques published on paper are considered propaganda, while the Internet is a gray area.

Still, there is no guarantee that Ms. Sánchez's activities won't land her in legal trouble. Even if jailed, Ms. Sánchez says she would find ways to publish her blog. "You have to believe that you are free and try to act like it," she says. "Little by little, acting as though you are free can be contagious."

Write to the Online Journal's editors at newseditors@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119829464027946687.html?mod=ONLX

Generation Y

2007-12-24T13:36:00.000-05:00

http://www.desdecuba.com/generationy/
Generation Y
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generatión Y is a Blog inspired by people like me, with names that start or contain a "Y". Born in the Cuba of the 70s and the 80s, marked by the "schools to the countryside", the Russian cartoons, the illegal exits and the frustration. So, an invitation goes especially to Yanisleidi, Yoandri, Yusimí, Yuniesky and others that drag their Ys, to read me and write back.

You too, Carlos?
12 de Diciembre, 2007

We spent Tuesday between the phone ringing and friends coming over to tell us that Carlos Otero -the best know pressenter in Cuban TV- had asked for assilum in the United States. This has been the news that has circulated the fastest “vox populis” in the last few months, maybe because it was about a Media man. He had got to be the only one who, in our sleepy programming, had a space with his own name: “Carlos y punto”.

Used as I am to see leave each year some of my friends, I am not
surprised that this “man of success” had chosen the way to exile. His decision looks like that of many that have understood that here they have no future, that have come to realize that Cuba is not a country where were dreams can come true. I confirm this every time I ask between my acquaintances about their plans and I receive -more than half the times- the phrase “what I want is to leave”. This answer grows alarmingly when we ask those of younger age.

This continuous bleeding that every month takes away the youngest, the boldest and, why not say it, the most talented, is a proof that the wellbeing of the people is not the center of attention of the Cuban government. Political and ideological elements, and loads carried from the past are prioritized above the “here” and “now” of our needs. While “up there” they don’t recognize that they haven’t been able to build a country where people want to stay and use their energies, the problem of emigration will not be solved.

How many will have to leave so that we can hear the phrase “we
failed”, we haven’t been able to give a future to Cubans. I suspect -because I know how hard head that comes with too many years in power- that not even the desolated stamp of an island of people aged and tired, with their sons living in other latitudes, will make the Cuban government come to reason. I imagine the accusations of “sold to imperialism” and “traitor” that will be heard these days in the Institute of Radio and Television, while talking about the exiled pressenter.

They don’t know that with the exit of Carlos Otero, those who stay here, feel the island increasingly empty and terribly boring.

Clasificado bajo: General 5 comentarios »

Coming out of the closet
12 de Diciembre, 2007

My friend Miguel, gay and dissident, feels hope with the new measures pushed by Mariela Castro, that will allow him access to sex change surgery. He dreams with having an I.D. card with an identity that is “She” and not “He” and with been treated as the woman he feels to be. He knows, however, that he’ll have to wait a lot longer to affiliate legally to a social-democratic party, to demonstrate in a picket for his labor rights or to vote -in direct elections- for another president.

With his new name, which for years is decided to be Olivia, he’ll not get rid completely from intolerance. Maybe he’ll get to be accepted in his differences, as long as this is about his “sexual preference” and not of ideological tendency. Coming out of the closet of his political opinions will take him time and they will remind him, at its due time, that this Revolution has allowed him the dream of his transexuality.

I can’t understand completely how we can invoke a tolerance which is isolated and not concluded. How can we be in the cutting edge in the subject of gay marriage and not allow -on the other hand- that we “marry” another political tendency or social doctrine. All of the thousands of Cubans locked in their closets of double morality, repressing their true opinions -as if they were an effeminate gesture- are waiting for a Mariela Castro to publicly say: “These too we have to accept and tolerate in their difference”. Miguel will be then the social-democratic woman that he has always dreamed of being.

Clasificado bajo: General 1 comentario »

Of TV classes and other absurdities
12 de Diciembre, 2007

Teo -that’s my son’s name- doesn’t belong to “Generation Y”, and nonetheless is an unlimited source of anecdotes for this Blog. His school stories give me smiles, concerns and one or other post (which he’s never interested in reading, because is “old people stuff”). Being up to date with what they say in his classroom, the music that he dances to, and the words that he invents connects me with those teenagers that some day will blame us for “this” which we are leaving to them.

A few weeks ago, my son came home with a Geography homework. “What are the portions in which Central America is divided?”, said the question, which got us to search in our memories and the dictionaries. I attempted to explain to Teo that in my time in high school, they used some other categories like “zones” or “areas” or “ecosystems”, but no this definition that reminded more of a piece of a pie than a stretch of land. So I inquired with him about the origin of such a novel category and I got as an answer: “They said it in the TV class”.

For those not up to date with the “new educational methods” of the Cuban medium education, I must explain that TV set in each classroom plays the role of teacher 60% of the school time. The youths get bored, can’t say “teacher, please repeat, I didn’t understand”, and copy without pause whatever they dictate in the screen. With this new pedagogic technique they attempt to alleviate the lack of teachers, caused by low salaries and little social or institutional recognition.

With the doubt of the “portions”, I went to school and asked a teacher (the flesh and blood one, not the virtual one in the screen) what meant that new geographic definition. I heard something familiar: “Ah, I don’t know, they said that in the TV classes”. So I decided to seat every morning to listen and take notes from the educational programs transmitted by TV. If I don’t do it, I won’t be able to review and evaluate Teo’s questions.

Into the role already of interpreting for my son the boring chit-chat of the “TV teacher” I have even got a VHS tape. Tomorrow I will start recording the TV classes!

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

Under construction
10 de Diciembre, 2007

Friends, as you will realize, I have just changed some things in the Blog. Amongst the most important of new functionalities, is the possibility of leaving comments.

Little by little, I’ll have to remake the archive of previous posts, so I ask you for patience.

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

Open up!
10 de Diciembre, 2007

Here I leave you this picture from last Saturday at the entrance to the Acapulco Cinema, to see the film “The Life of others”. I think that it has been the biggest mob seen in that festival. Those of us outside were yelling “Open up!”, after seeing that they were closing the doors, in reaction to the stampede that wanted in. I imagine that such scream was not limited to pass the entrance to the Acapulco Cinema, but it was a call to “Opening” with capital letters. I yelled it, also, thinking about the dams, the limits and the borders that have to yield and let us through.

Open up! We yelled outside the cinema and one hour later we could hear the character in the film saying “the wall has fallen”. “Open up!” -we said with faces against the glass, while we were pushed back-. “Open up!” -we continued thinking, even when we were already in the comfy chairs, the lights about to go off. “Open up!” -They were the words that I kept from that night, and I repeated them the next morning.

So, the movie, renamed here “Our lives”, allowed us to yell openly, right in the middle of 26th st, a verb that concentrates all of our desires: “Open up!”.

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

Those who don’t show their faces
7 de Diciembre, 2007

The film “The life of the others”, which will be shown on December 8th in the Acapulco Cinema, will put before the Cuban public scenes more than well known. The sample of German cinema, organized into the Festival of the New Latin-American Cinema, will bring us a story that could well be that of a neighbor, a friend or our own. It will confirm that the sensation of feeling observed is not a paranoid delirium of our minds, but the clear evidence of a spying machinery that acts in the shadows.

Those who are able to get a seat, will be able to identify in the face and the attitude of Wiesler (the Stasi captain) the agent “Moises” or “Erick”, “Carlos” or Alejandro. They will understand that the business of interfering telephone lines, fill a house with microphones, or blackmail someone with their darkest perversions, are techniques of which the boys of the Ministry of the Interior have no copyright.

I learned, long time ago, that the best way to fool the “safetists” is to make public everything that one thinks. By signing with the name, while saying aloud the opinions, and by not hiding anything, we disarm their dark maneuvers of vigilance. Let’s save them, then, with our “guts in the air”, the long hours of listening to recordings, the undercover agents, the priceless gas of the cars in which they move and the long shifts searching in the Internet our divergent opinions.

Let’s know also the these -the ones from here- are not German. So from time to time they neglect their work in order to look the moving hips of a girl passing; they also loose the papers or fall asleep while watch us through our windows. Regardless of that, they are
similar to the Teutonic agents in their inability to show face, to tell their real names or to sign and publish all of what they say –to the ear- in the impunity of the shadows.

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

The Venezuelan election
3 de Diciembre, 2007

When I went to bed past midnight, I already guessed that the NO option had won in Venezuela. How did I know? Because I’m used to read -with more attention- the omissions and the silences that the news themselves. So the little enthusiasm from the Cuban news media during Sunday, had already foretold me the results of the referendum in Venezuela

At six thirty in the morning today, the program “Buenos Dias” of Cuban television, gave a first news the message of the Minister of Health on the Day of the Medical Professionals. Shortly after, and obviating the journalism paradigms of “What, How and When”, they announced in the second headline that Chavez encouraged to continue deepening Socialism. -Ufff… The exercise took me a few seconds until finally I understood that the option of NO had won.

Even me, who have never taken part in a referendum and in most elections increase the number of the abstentions, understand the reach of the decision taken by the Venezuelan electorate. With their negative answer the Cubans have learned -it’s a shame that can’t apply it- that a simple monosyllabic word can be the dry stop that the authoritarians deserve. A brief word can stop the verbal incontinence of the politicians.

Today I’ll go out and try to insert in each phrase a “no”. I can already imagine the rain of understanding winks that will accompany each negation.

Clasificado bajo: General 1 comentario »

The other Havana
27 de Noviembre, 2007

There’s a city that happens besides us without touching us. It is a Havana that talks of “Parmesan cheese” of “lawn centimeters” and “weekends in Cancun”. It’s another town that barely mixes with ours and looks nothing like the scenario of landslides and lacking that forms our environment.

Both “Havanas” coexist and at the same time negate each other. Those who live into one can’t imagine -in all its extension- the other city that completes it. One happens rapidly over wheels, while ours ages in the stops, waiting for the bus. The sweet Havana of opulence displaces itself west, specially towards the Miramar zone, Cubanacan, Atabey and Jaimanitas. Mine, grows by jumps towards San Miguel, Diez de Octubre, El Calvario and Fontamar.

When both cities coincide and collide, they can’t comprehend each other: so far are the realities where they live. While one complains of its old Ikea furniture and of the difficulties in transporting the “moving container from the port”, the other one rocks in the aged chairs inherited from the grandparents and submerges in the black market.

My deteriorated Havana buys retail, talks softly and smells like sewage waters, while that city where ministers, high officials and diplomats dwell, moves amongst canapes, receptions, and exhales a delicate aroma of moisturizing creams. I prefer, however, the decrepit city that I haunt everyday, since at least it is coherent and transparent like what remains in it. I’ve made it to our image and likeness, or rather, we are the ones that imitate it in its resignation and its misery.

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

The new Mathematics
27 de Noviembre, 2007

Cubans are preparing ourselves for the inflated number of GDP growth that will be announced at the end of the year. Without having swallowed -yet- the 12.5 that was publicized at the end of 2006, we are hallucinating with the big number that will be informed in December. (If this time we get to the uncomfortable “thirteen”, then indeed there will be material to feed a rain of jokes during 2008).

We are still trying to find evidence to back the surprising index of economic development from last year. I, particularly, have looked in my wallet, in the kitchen and especially in the refrigerator, but the economic progress doesn’t seem to show around there. Neither is in the network of services or commerce, where we suffer a decrease in the offerings and a noticeable hike in the prices. I don’t perceive it, even, in the limited boom in construction and even less in the depressed agricultural production. Just by visiting my hospital or entering the closest school I discard that it is in those areas where we can find the effects of the economic dynamism.

Without letting that stop me, I have oriented my search to the part of the basic product basket that is composed by the products of rationing. However, the inflated GDP doesn’t show its positive effects in that direction either. The same reduced quantities and the well known empty aisles remain in that subsidized market.

Where is the shining recovery that such economic index seems to show? What complicated method of calculation have the specialists used, so that we can’t verify it with our own reality? Something has happened to mathematics, and I’m afraid that this year the tricky abacus of triumphalism will again calculate our meager development.

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

Kabbalah and Politics
20 de Noviembre, 2007

It is rumored that starting on January there will be a package of measures that would alleviate some of our daily difficulties. It was even predicted that there will be 17 or 25 new resolutions, amongst which are included the possibility of buying a car, opening a cell phone contract or traveling without the current exit permit. Such precise details shown in this street speculations barely surprise me, since desires get to project themselves frequently, with all of their complexities.

I don’t know if this rumors are part of another “lullaby” to keep us asleep for another three months, or if really something is cooking “upstairs”. Beforehand, I believe that if something is indeed announced in the first days of 2008, it won’t bring the structural changes that we need. The desired economic openings will come conditioned by ideological factors and the state property over the means of production will continue predominating in our economy.

The expected measures could only end all of our problems if they were discussed and approved by the majority of the people. As long as this doesn’t happen we’ll continue being “the mass”, to which it is necessary to “deliver guidance” without previous consultation. This current rumor, which the press and the media don’t reflect, is the palpable evidence that we are not the ones making the decisions. We are left, only, with the possibility of speculating.

Clasificado bajo: General 5 comentarios »

« Entradas anteriores

Yoani Sánchez (1975)
Licenciada en Filología.
Reside en La Habana y
combina su pasión por
la informática con su
trabajo en la
Revista Digital Consenso.
yoanisanchez@desdecuba.com

Archivos
Diciembre 2007
Noviembre 2007

Categorías
General (13)

Meta
Identificarse
XHTML válido
XFN
WordPress
--------------------------------------------------------
Generation Y está gestionado con WordPress Entradas (RSS) y Comentarios (RSS).

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

http://desdecuba.com/generaciony/
Generación Y
Generación Y es un Blog inspirado en gente como yo, con nombres que comienzan o contienen una "y griega". Nacidos en la Cuba de los años 70s y los 80s, marcados por las escuelas al campo, los muñequitos rusos, las salidas ilegales y la frustración. Así que invito especialmente a Yanisleidi, Yoandri, Yusimí, Yuniesky y otros que arrastran sus "y griegas" a que me lean y me escriban.

Versión al ingles

Una silla vacía
24 de Diciembre, 2007

Hoy voy a celebrar la noche buena con mi familia y mis amigos. Armaremos una improvisada mesa con las viejas puertas del ascensor y sobre ella una sábana hará las veces de mantel. Cada uno traerá algo para festejar. No tendremos las uvas, la sidra o el turrón, pero estaremos juntos y en armonía -lo cual es ya un lujazo-. Los niños tendrán su refresco garantizado, mientras que un roncito con limón o miel será el néctar para los adultos. Mi mamá contará lo complicado que fue comprar los tomates en la mañana y mi sobrina me recordará que el martes 25 actuará como angelito en la misa de su Parroquia.

A la cabeza de la mesa mantendremos una silla que permanece sin su ocupante desde la Navidad del 2003. Es el lugar de Adolfo Fernández Saínz –condenado en la Primavera Negra a quince años de prisión-. Será triste comprobar, por quinta vez, su ausencia. Si se lo permiten los carceleros, podremos escuchar su voz en el teléfono dándonos ánimo (¡Qué ironías tiene la vida! Él, que está en la cárcel, tiene fuerzas aún para infundar aliento).

Recuerdo el día en que le contamos a mi hijo que él estaba preso. Mi marido le dijo: “Teo, tu tío Adolfo está en la cárcel porque es un hombre muy valiente”, a lo que mi hijo respondió con su lógica infantil: “Entonces ustedes siguen libres porque son un poco cobardes”. ¡Qué manera más directa, de decir las verdades, tienen los niños! Sí, Teo, tienes razón: en esta Navidad calentamos aún nuestras sillas porque somos “cobardes”, deseamos en la intimidad de la familia un nuevo año de libertad, pues no logramos hacer de esos deseos una realidad. Nos conformamos con el mito de la fatalidad nacional, porque nos hemos dado por vencidos en el acto de cambiar las cosas.

La vacía silla de Adolfo será el territorio más libre de nuestra improvisada mesa navideña.

Clasificado bajo: General 9 comentarios »

Concierto para cerrar este agotado 2007
24 de Diciembre, 2007

Apretujados en el patio del Centro Pablo, hemos vuelto a escuchar a Pedro Luís Ferrer. La noche del sábado 22 de diciembre nos cayó encima mientras oíamos sus poemas y canciones, alegres de que estuviera aquí –de vuelta entre nosotros- el Gordo de la guitarra. Pedro ha llegado distinto y a la vez igualito. Tiene temas nuevos que nos transportan a las calles de Madrid y los intercala con sus conocidos acordes guajiros, sones y décimas.

La canción dedicada a su amigo Jesús Díaz donde confiesa que “si no me voy de Cuba, no entiendas que me quedo”, me confirmó en mi locura de permanecer aquí para “apagar la luz del Morro” (o para encenderla otra vez, ¿quién sabe?). Eso y mucho más le debo a este trovador, que después de siete meses en Europa llega ante su público –que ya tampoco es el mismo- y nos hace reír y lanzarnos miraditas cómplices con aquello de: “abuelo tiene un revolver y un cuchillo,/ y mientras no se lo quiten abuelo ofrece peligro (…)/ aunque pienses que no, dile que sí/ si lo contradices peor para ti”.

Pedro, tú has sido lo mejor de este aburrido y descolorido fin de año. Mucho más real que los tostones, que la yuca con mojo o que la limitada porción de carne de cerdo (sé que esta comparación te gustará, porque lo de goloso se nota en tus canciones y en tu talla). Tomaré, entonces, como propósito para este 2008 -que se nos viene encima- un par de versos tuyos: “tenemos que construir la democracia plena,/ que nadie me obligue a decir lo que no quiero”.

Los dejo con el texto de la canción que aparecía en el programa del concierto y que da título al mismo:
Canción de fin de añoAhora que permiten criticar:¡Qué bellos son tus ojos, vida mía!Me gusta tu manera de bailarY el fuero peculiar de tu alegría.

Ahora que permiten criticar:Me voy al Malecón y espero el día;Me quiero dedicar a descansar;Las flores del jardín son tan bonitas…

Ahora que permiten criticar:Estreno un pantalón y una camisa;Pusimos una hamaca en el portalY un timbre que parece campanita.

Ahora que hasta el mudo quiere hablarY está de moda el grito y la querella:Tus piernas, las quisiera devorar,El modo en que caminas y te sientas.

Ahora que permiten:La calle está repleta,Las bolas y los chistes,El cielo y las estrellas.
Ahora que permiten criticar:Compré un ordenador y una cazuela;Mi amigo preguntó para variar:La luna está redonda y placentera.

Pedro Luís Ferrer

Clasificado bajo: General Sin comentarios »

Sin pedigree
24 de Diciembre, 2007

Entre los centenares de mensajes que recibo cada semana hay ciertas preguntas y dudas que se repiten. A muchos les intriga “¿para quién trabajo?”, “¿de quién soy hija?” o “¿quién me paga por hacer esto? Sin intentar convencer a nadie (porque eso de exponer “mi verdad” es lo que más recuerda a un mea culpa) quiero aclarar algunas cosas:

- Nací en un solar de Centro Habana, en una de las esquinas de mi calle
decía “Jesús Peregrino” y en la otra “Jesús Pelegrino” (de manera que desde niña
he aprendido a convivir con la multiplicidad de formas con las que se puede
nombrar a una misma cosa).
- No tengo ningún pedigree familiar que me avale para nada, como no sea la
habilidad para apretar tuercas y reparar equipos eléctricos heredada de mi
padre, maquinista de trenes que en la crisis de los noventa cambió su uniforme
azul y blanco por un puesto de ponchero de bicicletas.
- Muchos de los que me conocen creen que tengo “guayabitos en la azotea”,
“me falta un tornillo” o “estoy ida del coco”. Todo lo que he hecho en esta
vidita (meterme en problemas, escribir una tesis sobre la literatura de la
dictadura en Latinoamérica, unir mi vida a un periodista en desgracia, regresar
a mi país y postear en este Blog) bien podría ser visto por un especialista como
manifestaciones de un desorden psiquiátrico. Todo es posible…
- A los que afirman –bajo la impunidad de un seudónimo- que soy del G2,
quiero aclararles que muy pocos en Cuba lo siguen llamando así. Ahora le decimos
“la seguridá”, “el Aparato”, “la maquinaria”, “el Armagedón”, “la trituradora”,
“los muchachos” o solamente “ellos”. Si alguien le preguntara a un joven “Oye
¿tú sabes qué cosa es el G2?” quizás respondería que se trata de un grupo de
Rock o de una marca de zapatos.
- No pienso dar ninguna prueba que niegue esas acusaciones de “infiltrada”.
A los que les alivia y les quita la culpa creer que “me atrevo porque estoy
protegida o que me han mandado a decir todo esto”, pues adelante. Cada cual –al
menos en el pequeño espacio de este Blog- puede pensar y comentar lo que
quiera.
- En relación con el dinero, la base material o el salario, me gusta citar
a mi marido cuando dice que tengo “alma de fakir”. Me visto con lo que aparezca,
hace años que no tengo más que un par de zapatos y como una vez al día. Una sola
obsesión de “consumo” recorre ahora mi vida: postear. El dinero que me gano
traduciendo del alemán, enseñándole la Habana a un par de turistas o vendiendo
mis viejos libros de la universidad, lo invierto –cuando puedo- en pagar media
hora de Internet. Por eso mis apariciones en “Generación Y” son a saltos y no
con la frecuencia de una bitácora.
- ¿Por qué yo tengo un Blog y otros no? Porque soy de una generación que ha
aprendido a moverse en el mundo de la tecnología, incluso teniendo que armar su
propio PC con piezas compradas en el mercado negro. Una de las contradicciones
que se está dando en la Cuba de hoy, es que los que tienen cosas más
interesantes que contar, son en su mayoría analfabetos informáticos. O sea, que
los asiduos lectores de blogs tienen que conformarse con gente como yo, sin
pedigree, pero para quien el mouse es una prolongación del propio cuerpo.

Clasificado bajo: General 8 comentarios »

De tele-clases y otros absurdos
12 de Diciembre, 2007

Teo –que así se llama mi hijo- no pertenece a la “Generación Y”, no obstante es fuente ilimitada de anécdotas para este Blog. Sus historias escolares me generan sonrisas, preocupaciones y algún que otro post (que nunca le interesa leer porque eso es “cosa de viejos”). Estar al tanto de lo que se dice en su aula, de la música que baila y de las palabras que inventa me conecta con esos adolescentes que algún día nos echarán en cara “esto” que les estamos legando.

Hace un par de semanas mi hijo llegó a casa con una tarea de Geografía. “¿Cuáles son las porciones en las que está dividida América Central?” decía la pregunta, que nos puso a indagar en la memoria y en los diccionarios. Intenté explicarle a Teo que en mi época de la secundaria, se utilizaban otras categorías como “zonas”, “áreas” o “ecosistemas”, pero no esta definición que más bien recordaba a un trozo de pastel que a una franja de territorio. De manera que lo interrogué sobre el origen de tan novedosa categoría y obtuve como respuesta: “Eso lo dijeron en la tele-clase”.

Para aquellos que no están muy actualizados en los “nuevos métodos educativos” de la enseñanza media cubana, debo explicarles que un televisor -en cada aula- hace las veces de profesor alrededor del 60 % del horario docente. Los jóvenes se aburren, no pueden decir “Profe, repita que no entendí” y copian sin parar lo que les dictan desde la pantalla. Con esa nueva técnica pedagógica se intenta paliar la crisis de maestros, motivada por los bajos salarios y el poco reconocimiento social e institucional.

Con la duda de “las porciones” me fui hacia la escuela y le pregunté al profesor (al de carne y hueso, no al virtual de la pantalla) qué significaba aquella nueva definición geográfica. Escuché entonces algo conocido: “Ah, no sé, eso lo dijeron en las tele-clases”. De manera que he decidido sentarme cada mañana a escuchar y tomar nota de los programas educativos transmitidos por la televisión. Si no lo hago así, cómo podré ayudar a repasar y evacuar las interrogantes de Teo.

Metida ya en el rol de interpretar para mi hijo la aburrida perorata del “profe televisivo” he conseguido hasta un cassette VHS. ¡Mañana mismo, comenzaré a grabar las tele-clases!

Clasificado bajo: General 43 comentarios »

Salir del armario
12 de Diciembre, 2007

Mi amigo Miguel, gay y contestatario, se siente esperanzado con las nuevas medidas impulsadas por Mariela Castro, que le permitirán acceder a una cirugía de cambio de sexo. Sueña con tener un carné de identidad que diga que es “ella” y no “él” y con ser tratado como la mujer que se siente. Sabe, sin embargo, que tendrá que esperar mucho más para afiliarse legalmente a un partido socialdemócrata, para manifestarse con un cartel por sus derechos laborales o para votar -en elecciones directas- por otro presidente.

Con su nuevo nombre, que desde hace años tiene decidido que será Olivia, no se librará del todo de la intolerancia. Quizás llegue a ser aceptado en su diferencia, siempre que está sea “de preferencia sexual” y no de “tendencia ideológica”. Salir del armario de sus opiniones políticas le llevará más tiempo y le recordarán, en su debido momento, que esta Revolución le ha permitido el sueño de su transexualidad.

No entiendo muy bien como se puede convocar a la tolerancia parcelada e inconclusa. Cómo se puede estar a la avanzada en el tema de los matrimonios entre homosexuales y no permitir –por otro lado- que nos “casemos” con otra tendencia política o doctrina social. Todos los miles de cubanos encerrados en sus armarios de doble moral, reprimiéndose sus verdaderas opiniones –como si de un gesto afeminado se tratara- están esperando porque una Mariela Castro diga públicamente: “A estos también hay que aceptarlos y tolerarlos en su diferencia”. Miguel será entonces la mujer socialdemócrata que siempre ha soñado.

Clasificado bajo: General 12 comentarios »

¿Tú también, Carlos?
12 de Diciembre, 2007

El martes lo pasamos entre el teléfono que sonaba y los amigos que venían para contarnos que Carlos Otero -el más conocido presentador de la televisión cubana- había pedido asilo en Estados Unidos. Esta ha sido la noticia que más rápidamente ha circulado vox populi en los últimos meses, quizás por tratarse de un hombre de los medios. Había llegado a ser el único que, en nuestra somnífera programación, tenía un espacio con su propio nombre: “Carlos y punto”.

Acostumbrada como estoy a ver partir cada año a varios de mis amigos, no me sorprende que este “hombre de éxito” haya escogido el camino del exilio. Su decisión se parece a la de muchos otros que han comprendido que aquí no tienen futuro, que han llegado a darse cuenta que Cuba no es un país donde realizar los sueños. Eso lo confirmo cada vez que pregunto entre mis conocidos sobre sus planes y recibo -más de la mitad de la veces- la frase “yo lo que quiero es irme de aquí”. Respuesta ésta que aumenta alarmantemente cuando se interroga a los de menos edad.
Esta continúa sangría que cada mes se lleva a los más jóvenes, a los más atrevidos y, por qué no decirlo, a los más talentosos, es la demostración de que el bienestar de la población no está siendo el centro de atención del gobierno cubano. Elementos políticos, ideológicos y cargas arrastradas del pasado son priorizadas por encima del “aquí” y el “ahora” de nuestras necesidades. Mientras por “allá arriba” no se reconozca que no han logrado construir un país donde la gente quiera quedarse y emplear sus energías, no podrá resolverse el drama de la emigración.

Cuántos tendrán que irse para que escuchemos la frase de “hemos fracasado, no hemos podido darle un futuro a los cubanos”. Sospecho -porque ya conozco la testarudez que trae tantos años en el poder- que ni siquiera la desolada estampa de una isla de gente envejecida y cansada, con sus hijos viviendo en otras latitudes, hará entrar en razón al gobierno cubano. Me imagino las acusaciones de “apátrida”, “vendido al imperialismo” y “traidor” que se escucharán por estos días, en el Instituto de Radio y Televisión, al hablar del asilado presentador.

No saben ellos que con la salida de Carlos Otero, los que quedamos aquí, sentimos la isla cada vez más vacía y terriblemente aburrida.

Clasificado bajo: General 37 comentarios »

En reparaciones
10 de Diciembre, 2007

Amigos, como se darán cuenta acabo de cambiar algunas cosas en el Blog. Entre las más importantes, de las nuevas funcionalidades, está la posibilidad de dejar comentarios.
Poco a poco, tendré que rehacer el archivo de los post anteriores, así que les pido paciencia.
Clasificado bajo: General 49 comentarios »

¡Abran!
10 de Diciembre, 2007

Aquí les dejo esta foto del pasado sábado a la entrada del cine Acapulco para ver el filme “La vida de los otros”. Creo que ha sido la “molotera” más grande que se ha visto en este Festival.
Los que estábamos afuera gritamos ¡Abran!, al ver que cerraban las puertas ante la avalancha descontrolada que quería entrar. Intuyo que aquel grito no se reducía a pasar el umbral del cine Acapulco, sino que era un llamado a la “Apertura” con mayúsculas. Yo lo grité, también, pensando en los diques, los límites y las fronteras que tienen que ceder y dejarnos pasar.

¡Abran! Gritamos fuera del cine y una hora después oíamos a un personaje del filme decir “El muro se cayó”. ¡Abran! Dijimos con las caras pegadas al cristal, mientras nos empujaban desde atrás ¡Abran! Seguimos pensando aún cuando ya estábamos en las mullidas butacas, a punto de apagarse las luces. ¡Abran! Fue la palabra que me quedó de esa noche y la que repetí al otro día en la mañana.

De manera que la película, rebautizada aquí como “La vida de nosotros” nos permitió gritar a viva voz, en plena calle 26, un verbo que concentra todos nuestros deseos: ¡Abran!

Clasificado bajo: General 41 comentarios »

Los que no dan la cara
7 de Diciembre, 2007

El filme “La vida de los otros” que se proyectará el 8 de diciembre en el Cine Acapulco, pondrá ante el público cubano escenas más que conocidas. La muestra de cine alemán, organizada dentro del Festival del Nuevo Cine Latinoamericano, nos traerá una historia que bien podría ser la de un vecino, la de un amigo o la nuestra propia. Nos confirmará que la sensación de sentirnos observados no es un delirio paranoico de nuestras mentes, sino la clara evidencia de un aparato de espionaje que actúa en las sombras.

Aquellos que logren atrapar una butaca, podrán identificar en el rostro y la actitud de Wiesler (el capitán de la Stasi) al agente “Moisés”, a “Erick”, “Carlos” o “Alejandro”. Comprenderán que eso de intervenir las líneas telefónicas, llenar de micrófonos una vivienda o chantajear a alguien con sus más oscuras perversiones, son técnicas de las que los inquietos muchachos del Ministerio del Interior, no tienen el copyright.

Aprendí, hace tiempo, que la mejor forma de burlar a los “segurosos” es hacer público todo lo que uno piensa. Al firmar con el nombre, al decir por lo alto las opiniones y al no esconder nada, les desarmamos sus oscuras maniobras de vigilancia. Ahorrémosles pues, con nuestras “vísceras al aire”, las largas horas de escuchar grabaciones, los agentes encubiertos, la preciada gasolina de los autos en los que se mueven y las maratónicas jornadas buscando en Internet nuestras opiniones divergentes.

Sepamos también que “estos” -los de aquí- no son “alemanes”. Así que de vez en cuando descuidan su trabajo para mirar las cimbreantes caderas de una joven que pasa; se les pierden los papeles o se quedan dormidos mientras atisban por nuestras ventanas. No obstante, se parecen a los agentes teutones en su incapacidad para dar la cara, para decir sus verdaderos nombres o para firmar y publicar todo aquello que nos dicen –al oído- en la impunidad de la penumbra.

Clasificado bajo: General 7 comentarios »

La e-Lección de Venezuela
3 de Diciembre, 2007

Cuando me acosté pasada la medianoche, ya intuía que en Venezuela había ganado la opción del NO. ¿Cómo lo sabía? Porque estoy acostumbrada a leer –con más atención- las omisiones y los silencios que las propias noticias. De manera que el poco entusiasmo de los medios informativos cubanos, durante el domingo, ya me había adelantado los resultados del referéndum venezolano.

A las seis y treinta de la mañana de hoy, el programa “Buenos Días” de la televisión cubana, dio como primera noticia el mensaje del ministro de Salud Pública por el día del Médico. Poco después y obviando los paradigmas periodísticos de “el qué, el cómo y el cuándo” nos anunciaron, en el segundo titular, que Chávez exhortaba a continuar profundizando el Socialismo. Ufff… el ejercicio de extraer la información de tan sofisticada elipsis, me llevó algunos segundos hasta que finalmente comprendí que el NO se había impuesto.

Incluso yo, que nunca he participado en un referéndum y que en la mayoría de las votaciones engroso el número de las abstenciones, comprendo la envergadura de la decisión tomada por el electorado venezolano. Con su negativa los cubanos hemos aprendido –lástima que no podamos aplicarlo- que un simple monosílabo puede ser la parada en seco que se merecen los autoritarios. Una breve palabra puede detener la incontinencia verbal de los políticos.

Hoy saldré a la calle y probaré a intercalar en cada frase un “no”. Ya me imagino el aluvión de guiños cómplices que acompañará a cada negativa.

Clasificado bajo: General 8 comentarios »

« Entradas anteriores

Yoani Sánchez (1975)
Licenciada en Filología.
Reside en La Habana y
combina su pasión por
la informática con su
trabajo en la
Revista Digital Consenso.
yoanisanchez@desdecuba.com

Archivos
Diciembre 2007
Noviembre 2007
Octubre 2007
Septiembre 2007
Agosto 2007
Julio 2007
Junio 2007
Mayo 2007

Categorías
General (60)
Enlaces
Bar Habana
Bitácora cubana
Blog de Emilio Ichikawa
Blog de Enrisco
Blog de Tania Quintero
Cuaderno de Cuba
Cubanistica
Cubista Magazine
Desde aquí
El archivo de Connie
Epepeh
Havanascity
La Habana elegante
La nueva Cuba
Luces y sombras
Mi isla al mediodía
Misceláneas de Cuba
Pavontales
Penúltimos días
Por la izquierda
Revista Digital Consenso
Yayabo

Meta
Identificarse
XHTML válido
XFN
WordPress
Generación Y está gestionado con WordPress Entradas (RSS) y Comentarios (RSS).

CB9 Confronts Politicians Following Expansion Approval

2007-12-23T11:26:00.000-05:00

CB9 Confronts Politicians Following Expansion Approval
By Daniel Amzallag
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 23

A Community Board 9 meeting was especially heated Thursday night, as board members and neighborhood residents confronted elected officials in light of Columbia’s recently-approved Manhattanville expansion plan.

The meeting followed a City Council vote on Wednesday in which the Council came down in favor of the plan to rezone 36 acres of Manhattanville, an action that will enable the University to build a 17-acre campus. As part of the mandatory public review process, CB9 voted on the plan and rejected it almost unanimously.

Many board members have served as voices of opposition throughout the entire review process, questioning aspects of Columbia’s plan and harshly criticizing the West Harlem Local Development Corporation, a body of neighborhood representatives selected to negotiate a community benefits agreement with Columbia. On Wednesday morning, the LDC and Columbia signed a memorandum of understanding for a community benefits agreement of $150 million after nearly a year of negotiations.

At Thursday’s meeting, attendees expressed frustration with the LDC’s alleged lack of responsiveness to the community at large. CB9 member Norma Ramos said the LDC has not sufficiently presented information to the community, adding that because of its inaction, “Columbia has basically gotten everything that they wanted and are doing so with paying very little to the community.”

But incoming CB9 chair and LDC officer Pat Jones said election to the LDC is “a very public process,” and members have to report to their constituent groups. “At just sheer dollars, I don’t think that’s necessarily the barometer or the sole barometer—it’s the results of whatever you do,” she said.

City Councilman Robert Jackson, D-Manhattanville and Washington Heights, stood by his vote in favor of Columbia’s plan, saying he believes it to be in the community’s best interests. “You have a right not to vote for me and not to elect me—if you don’t like how your elected representatives represent you, vote them out of office,” he said.

Jackson faced criticism from board member Walter South and local resident Tom DeMott, CC ’80 and leader of the anti-expansion Coalition to Preserve Community. They accused Jackson of “pre-selling” his Council vote by helping negotiate the community benefits agreement Wednesday morning before he voted.

Jackson responded that he “was trying to assist wherever I could to resolve an outstanding issue,” rather than participating in the negotiations. Jackson’s chief of staff, Susan Russell, is an officer of the LDC.

Nellie Bailey, local resident and a member of the CPC, said Jackson had been “deliberately misleading” in justifying a Wednesday City Council vote, which many have said was rushed.

Jackson responded to these concerns Wednesday, saying that the expansion process had been going on for years. “You attempted to confuse that the vote had to take place with other processes that others were not talking about,” Bailey said.

“People wanted to wrap up business before the winter break, and it was ready to happen, and it did happen,” Jackson responded, adding that there had never been guarantee that the vote would take place Wednesday.

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, who voted in favor of Columbia’s 197-c rezoning plan as part of the review process, also spoke at the meeting. He said his goal “has always been that “Columbia coexists with the community without overrunning it.”

Bailey questioned Stringer as to his allegedly inconsistent statements regarding the use of eminent domain in Columbia’s expansion, allegations which Stringer denied.

Stringer and Jackson were met with applause as well as loud but isolated boos and shouts as they were each introduced to speak to the crowd. Local resident Michael Henry Adams, also a Harlem historian, shouted, “Sellout! Uncle Tom sellout!” as they spoke. CB9 District Manager Lawrence McClean asked Adams to leave the meeting, and upon refusal threatened him with arrest by two on duty police officers. Adams was allowed to stay after a ten minute altercation, though he left before the meeting ended.

“Take your medication,” Stringer said to Adams’ out-of-turn shouts that Stringer was “destroying this city” and “destroying our community.”

But the hostility towards elected officials is not shared by all members of the community, Jones said. “It’s one of those cases where you’ve got very vocal passionate individuals, and you’ve got a silent majority out there,” she said. “There was some very obnoxious behavior, but if you did a count, the majority of people did not have that response or reaction.”

“It’s disgusting,” outgoing CB9 chair Jordi Reyes-Montblanc said of several members’ behavior. “The disrespect doesn’t touch Robert Jackson or Scott Stringer—the disrespect is to me, and that offends me, and I cannot allow it.”

At the end of Thursday's meeting, the board held elections for next year's officers. Jones was unanimously elected next year's chair. Assistant treasurer Yvonne Stennett will be next year's 2nd vice chair, and board member Anthony Fletcher will be next year's treasurer. 1st vice chair Carolyn Thompson and secretary Theodore Kovaleff will keep their positions next year.

View Comments ( 2)Post a Comment

I could not agree more with the previous comments. As a member of the silent community supporting Columbia's plans (with personal reservations about eminent domain and a desire to see more affordable housing within the expansion) the disrespect and bullying by the "opposition" caused me to stop attending public meetings and submit written testimony instead.

The constant disruptions and frequent misinformation on the part of the CPC and its supporters was less respectful (and legitimate) opposition and more fascist bullying by self-appointed "leaders" of the community.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 24th, 2007 @ 10:52am
reply

look at the way they make a mockery of the meetings with no discipline and irrational statements. How can we take these activists seriously when they act like hooligans and cannot work in a respectful manner.

Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 24th, 2007 @ 3:48am
reply

Two points of clarification:
1. I ordered the District Manager to call the Police and remove Mr. Adams after he had been strongly advised to behave. Mr. Adams is a talented historian but a boorish twit that can be very disruptive and has a history of such behaviour. CM Jackson and MBP Stringer asked me not to do it, but I did and was about to have him arrested when a number of Board Members asked me not to do that in order to avoid Mr. Adams further embrarrasment and I agreed not to have him arrested provided he behaved and be quiet, which he did. Other hecklers paid attention to my instructions for quiet and were not in any way threatened with arrest.

2. I welcome dissent, I am a dissidenter; but there is no need to become offensive and call insulting names to any one.
As Chairman I am responsible for the proper conduct of any meeting and the disrespect is much more towards the chairman when the public ignores and defies the Chair's directions, and that will never happen at a CB9M meeting ever again I swore after the infamous Dinkins shout-down.

J. Reyes-Montblanc, Chairman

Community Board 9 Manhattan

Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 24th, 2007 @ 11:51am
reply

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28620

Columbia expansion forges ahead, despite opposition

2007-12-22T12:42:00.000-05:00

crain'snewyorkbusiness.com

Columbia expansion forges ahead, despite opposition
Project will put school, area on new path; eminent domain still issue
December 22. 2007 11:47AM
By: Judith Messina

The City Council's approval this month of Columbia University's $6 billion plan to extend its campus—and remake a large swath of West Harlem in the process—marked what many hope will usher in a new era of prominence for the university and a renaissance for the Manhattanville neighborhood.

Over roughly two decades, Columbia will put up 16 to 18 buildings, including dormitories, classrooms, research labs and performing arts spaces. The venture is expected to create about 6,000 jobs and transform a shabby enclave of auto repair shops, warehouses and small manufacturing plants into a pedestrian-friendly environment with more open space, restaurants and shops.

Competitive footing

The school hopes the expansion will put the chronically cramped institution on an equal footing with universities such as Harvard and Princeton in the competition for students, faculty and research dollars.

Columbia argues that its growth is critical to the city as well as to the university.

"Is New York going to continue to be the capital not just of business and finance, but also of ideas and science and medical leadership?" asks Columbia Executive Vice President David Stone.

The plan has been the fulcrum of an extended battle between Columbia and Manhattanville—a battle containing racial and class overtones. The community fears that the university's expansion will overwhelm it and spark a wave of gentrification that will force out artists and manufacturers, and make rents unaffordable. Looming over the project is the possibility that Columbia will seek to have the state exercise its right of eminent domain for the remaining commercial properties needed to realize the school's vision. Opponents argue that for the state to do so would constitute a misuse of eminent domain.

Benefits agreement

To mollify the community and help mend the historically contentious relationship, Columbia has offered a benefits agreement that includes $20 million for affordable housing and $30 million for grade-school education. The university also opened a math and science public high school in September.

Foes of the expansion acknowledge that the project is important for New York.

"There will certainly be a benefit to the city as a whole," says Brad Lander, director of the Pratt Center for Community Development, which advised local Community Board 9 on its own plan for the neighborhood. "It will be good for more people than it is today, but it's a different set of people. Will it be better or worse for the people who live nearby? It will be much less theirs, and there will be fewer decent job opportunities for them."

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071223/FREE/303249700/1010/toc

For a Top-Tier University, There’s Now Room to Get Even Better

2007-12-21T21:39:00.000-05:00

N.Y. / Region

For a Top-Tier University, There’s Now Room to Get Even Better

By KAREN W. ARENSON
Published: December 21, 2007

As Columbia University officials doggedly pursued their plan to acquire 17 acres a few blocks north of their main campus in Manhattan, they often pulled out a chart showing their pint-size 36-acre campus stacked up against those of competitors like Harvard, Princeton and Yale, whose campuses are measured in the hundreds of acres.

Skip to next paragraph
Related
Despite Earlier Defiance, Holdouts in Columbia’s Expansion Zone Are Down to 3
(December 21, 2007)
EDUCATION: Columbia Expansion Gets Green Light (December 20, 2007)

The New York City Council’s approval of a rezoning plan Wednesday that clears the way for the expansion in Manhattanville, in Harlem, will still not put Columbia into the big leagues on space. But Lee C. Bollinger, Columbia’s president, says it will give the space-starved university enough room to hold its own for decades to come in an increasingly competitive arena.

“The key to preserving and enhancing Columbia’s greatness is space,” Mr. Bollinger said on Thursday. “It’s always space and resources. But in this case, space was critical.”

He added that while the university had used space deftly — and would probably rank highest if universities were judged on creativity per square foot — it had pretty much reached the limit.

In critical rankings like research dollars received from the National Institutes of Health, for example, Columbia slipped because it did not have enough laboratory space to bring in more researchers, officials said. The business school set up offices in Midtown.

“It has been a tremendous inhibition for scientific research particularly, but also for virtually every area,” said Alan Brinkley, Columbia’s provost. “Many departments we
re at a point where the simple absence of offices made it impossible to hire.”
“That is still true,” Dr. Brinkley added. “It will be years before the space in Manhattanville opens up. But this gives us the ability to envision a very different future.”
Columbia has already purchased or has contracts to buy many of the properties in the area that it plans to move into, and is negotiating with the owners of other properties. The possibility that it will seek help from the government in acquiring some property through eminent domain remains on the table.

But even as the university waited for zoning approval, it hired planners and architects to begin sketching ideas. The Italian architect Renzo Piano will provide the overall design for the first buildings, which will include the business school, the arts school, the School of International and Public Affairs and a science center to study mind, brain and behavior.

“What gets unleashed now is the energy to complete the academic planning among faculty, the architects’ work on the design, and the engineers’ work on implementation,” said Robert Kasdin, senior executive vice president at Columbia.

He said he anticipated that Columbia would begin demolition by next summer.

Mr. Kasdin and Mr. Bollinger said they hoped that some buildings would be completed in four to five years. By 2015, they plan to have added about 1.5 million square feet of usable space. As schools and departments move north from the Morningside Heights campus, that will free up space on the main campus, particularly for the arts and sciences.

The new acreage will have a very different feel from Columbia’s neo-Classical main campus, designed more than a century ago by McKim, Mead & White and set around a quadrangle.

The new campus will not have a quadrangle or gates, but will be more integrated into the community, the university says, with coffee shops and stores along the sidewalks of 125th Street. It will be akin to New York University’s core campus, but with an overarching design.

Mr. Bollinger said the prospect of new space had already helped revitalize the university’s fund-raising. He said that after Stanford and Harvard, Columbia raised more money last year than any other university in the competitive “Ivy plus” group, which includes the Ivy League and several other selective universities.

Columbia officials say their expansion will also create opportunities for the community, some defined through negotiations with the West Harlem Local Development Corporation and some that the university simply wants to pursue.

Maxine Griffith, Columbia’s executive vice president for government and community affairs, said one call she received on Thursday was from a neighborhood resident who said:
“Congratulations. Now you’ve got to keep your promises.”
She said Columbia planned to do just that.

Next Article in New York Region (8 of 29) »

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/nyregion/21expansion.html

Columbia vote (35-5-6) vs. AY vote (4-0), newspaper coverage, and the value left in ULURP

2007-12-21T20:00:00.000-05:00

Atlantic Yards Report
This watchdog blog offers analysis, commentary, and reportage about Forest City Ratner's planned $4 billion Atlantic Yards project, the largest ever in Brooklyn, to build a basketball arena plus at least 16 high-rise buildings. It follows up on my 9/1/05 report on New York Times coverage of the project and the TimesRatnerReport blog (links below). [Note that some posts are truncated: be sure to click "Read the full post."]

Friday, December 21, 2007

Columbia vote (35-5-6) vs. AY vote (4-0), newspaper coverage, and the value left in ULURP

What a difference the city's Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) makes, at least in terms of public awareness. The City Council's contentious approval of Columbia University's West Harlem development plan merited front-page, above-the-fold coverage in the New York Times yesterday (albeit attached to graphics regarding Governor's Island plans; click to enlarge), as the vote was 35-5, with 6 abstentions. (Gotham Gazette called it divisive, and highlighted those not toeing the line.)

By contrast, on 12/6/06, when the Empire State Development Corporation board voted 4-0 to approve the Atlantic Yards project after perfunctory and uninformed discussion, the Times placed the article, headlined A Nod for Atlantic Yards, and Then a Lawsuit, on page 3 of the Metro section. The ESDC meeting lasted 15 minutes; the City Council hearing Wednesday elapsed over five hours, including breaks.

There wasn't any contentiousness; as I noted, the press release had already been prepared when the 3:30 pm board meeting began. Still, as an example of how business gets done in New York, it was worth a closer look, and the Times article, which did look skeptically at some statements by then-ESDC Chairman Charles Gargano, simply described the board meeting as "largely anticlimactic."

AY via ULURP?

Consider what might have occurred had the Atlantic Yards project gone through ULURP. It likely would have passed the City Council, thanks to the city's and Forest City Ratner's political muscle, but the criticism voiced by the three affected community boards would have gotten much more airing. And, at the City Council vote, critics like Council Members Letitia James and Charles Barron would have had a platform for their views.

An Atlantic Yards critic on the ESDC board might have flayed fellow board member Charles Dorkey for his uninformed question about the location of Atlantic Yards: “What are the cross streets for (Site) 5”). That critic might have said that it was time to start rather than conclude examination of the project.

And even if ULURP is a "complete sham," as Municipal Art Society Kent Barwick has said, it is superior to the ESDC process, not just because it provides a greater opportunity for a democratic vote but because, as shown yesterday, it provides more of a platform for public scrutiny. And Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff now acknowledges Atlantic Yards probably should've gone through ULURP.

PACB approval

When the three-member Public Authorities Control Board approved the project two weeks later, on 12/20/06, the Times did run the story on the front page the next day. (Here's No Land Grab on the anniversary.)

But the coverage, headlined State Approves Major Complex For Brooklyn, was about inside political maneuvering, and then outside reaction from project critics. The approval votes by Republican Gov. George Pataki, who owed little fealty to Brooklyn voters, and Republican Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, were in the can.

The real drama revolved around Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver of Lower Manhattan, again not elected by Brooklynites but deeply engaged in city dealmaking. The Times reported: Yesterday's vote followed days of intense negotiation between officials at the Empire State Development Corporation, which is overseeing the project, and aides to Sheldon Silver, the speaker of the State Assembly, who has one of three votes on the control board.None of those voting, however, got a chance to express any dissent. The approval vote took just five minutes.

# posted by Norman Oder @ 6:02 AM

Comments:
When is a ULURP hearing (and process) not a ULURP hearing (and process)? When the public officials before whom the hearing is held say that isn’t within their purview to do anything concerning the public action issues about which the public testifies at the hearing.

Before we get too enthusiastic about the beneficial result of the fuller ULURP process that applied to Columbia’s rezoning and takeover of West Harlem, let’s remind ourselves that, though it was a fuller process, what is being proposed by Columbia was not treated to a full ULURP process.

Yes, Columbia ‘s expansion will not integrate or share space with the neighborhood, involves a great deal of rezoning principally for the special benefit of Columbia, will wipe out a swath of older buildings, including historic ones, and does not look to designate as landmark old buildings that might actually be saved. Yes, all of this was subject to ULURP review and hearings, but one of the most highly objectionable aspects where the Columbia plan diverges from the plan wanted by the Community Board is Columbia’s strategic use of eminent domain to acquire property. The eminent domain is to be exercised by the Empire State Development Corporation and this was not treated as being subject to ULURP.

The City Planning Commission held hearings but the Planning Commissioners voting for Columbia’s plan pointedly put it on record that eminent domain was not something they were deciding upon and that this was instead the State’s responsibility. They side-stepped the issue which is to say they gave the public testimony against eminent domain no effect (and also ignored CB9's position on this). Similarly, there were City Council Members last week who excoriated as abysmal the situation with eminent domain, complained about the lack of local and City Council control and called for the state legislature to pass remedial legislation to fix it. Then, they voted for Columbia’s plan since they said they could only be voting on something other than eminent domain as it was so entirely out of their control that it was, perforce, outside their preview. This is again to say that they gave the public testimony against eminent domain no effect while also ignoring the Community Board on this.

It was all of course an exercise in political buck passing. The idea of ULURP is political accountability. So long as eminent domain is done with the distortion of a State agency acting outside the ULURP process (which it needn’t be) there has not been a full ULURP process.Had there been a full ULURP process where it was absolutely clear that it was the responsibility of public officials to consider and act on eminent domain based upon the public’s testimony and community board input the vote tallies might have been different. Yes, if the public and community board had been treated with greater deference results might have been different.

# posted by MDDW : 10:43 PM

Name: Norman Oder
Contact: timesreport@hotmail.com
Info: http://tinyurl.com/al22x

http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2007/12/columbia-vote-35-5-6-vs-ay-vote-4-0.html

Despite Earlier Defiance, Holdouts in Columbia’s Expansion Zone Are Down to 3

2007-12-21T13:36:00.000-05:00

N.Y. / Region

Despite Earlier Defiance, Holdouts in Columbia’s Expansion Zone Are Down to 3

By TIMOTHY WILLIAMS
Published: December 21, 2007

When Columbia University began buying property north of its Morningside Heights campus for its planned expansion a few years ago, a group of longtime business owners formed an alliance and pledged never to sell.

Nick Sprayregen, a Harlem landowner,
is taking a stand against Columbia.
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Now, three years later, all but two of the six family-owned firms in the alliance, the West Harlem Business Group, have sold their property to the university, leaving the two owners increasingly edgy about what might happen next, as Columbia prepares to start the largest expansion in its history.

Those two businesses — both moving and storage concerns — along with the owner of two service stations who was not in the alliance, are the only remaining holdouts in the Manhattanville neighborhood. More than three dozen others — meat wholesale companies, auto body shops, restaurants, construction supply stores, tire repair shops, warehouses and a window manufacturer among them — have sold their property to Columbia and have agreed to leave once construction begins.

A Columbia official said demolition could begin by summer. The university has said it plans to keep only about three buildings in the narrow 17-acre stretch, which is bounded roughly by 133rd Street on the north, Broadway on the east, 125th Street on the south and Riverside Drive on the west. Columbia plans to move many of its science laboratories and business and arts schools onto the new campus eventually.

Thursday, a day after the City Council approved a rezoning plan to allow the university’s expansion, one of the three owners said she was too distraught to speak, another vowed to continue fighting all the way to the Supreme Court, and the third, the Singh family, owner of the service stations, declined to comment.

Columbia would not say whether it was negotiating with the business owners. It has said it owns about 90 percent of the privately owned property in the 17-acre area. It has not ruled out asking the state to invoke eminent domain to obtain the remaining commercial properties in the area.

Some of the buildings purchased by the university have been boarded up, apparently ready for demolition, and the university has some administrative offices in buildings that will remain standing.

Despite the impending changes, the neighborhood was active Thursday. People were eating Big Macs at a McDonald’s and arroz con pollo at La Floridita, changing worn tires at a repair shop without a visible name, and dropping off furniture at storage centers. Each of those businesses is scheduled for demolition.

Anne Z. Whitman, owner of Hudson North American, a moving and storage company on Broadway between 129th and 130th Streets, said on Thursday that the stress of the City Council rezoning vote had made thoughts about her situation too painful to discuss.
“I can’t talk without becoming emotional,” Ms. Whitman said during a brief telephone interview.

During an interview last year, Ms. Whitman said the university had offered her $4 million for her six-story, 35,000-square foot building.

“No way Columbia is going to steal this property right out from underneath me,” Ms. Whitman said in August 2006. “Remember that man who stood in front of the tank at Tiananmen Square? That’s me.”

Ms. Whitman’s father, Joseph A. Zuhusky, a former F.B.I. agent, started in the moving and storage business after he bought several buildings in Harlem in the 1960s and ’70s. Several of his children followed suit, and eventually Ms. Whitman and two of her brothers purchased their father’s buildings.

While Ms. Whitman operates Hudson North American, her brothers own Despatch Moving and Storage in a 10-story building a block up Broadway.

The family was among the founders of the West Harlem Business Group, and was among the most vocal about their unwillingness to sell. But in August, her brothers accepted an offer from the university, creating a family rift and leaving Ms. Whitman feeling isolated. The terms of the sale have not been made public, and a call seeking comment at Despatch Moving and Storage was not returned Thursday.

The second moving and storage owner is Nicholas Sprayregen, 44, who is also the largest landowner in Manhattanville aside from the university. He owns five Tuck-It-Away Self-Storage buildings, four of which could become targets of forced sale under the power of eminent domain.

While most of his 300,000 square feet of space is reserved for self-storage, he also rents space to an El Mundo Department Store at Broadway and 133rd Street, and to a C-Town Supermarket one block away at 134th Street.

Mr. Sprayregen, who has become the face of the opposition, makes no secret that he is wealthy.

He has vowed that he will spend as much money as it takes to keep the university from getting his property via eminent domain. On one of his buildings hangs a giant banner, reading “Stop Eminent Domain Abuse!” that is visible to riders on the No. 1 subway line through Harlem.
“This isn’t about money, I’m fighting them over principle — I strongly believe the use of eminent domain here is wrong,” said Mr. Sprayregen, who said he has finished 20 marathons but has stopped running in order to devote more time to battling the university.

“I have the strong desire — and the financial ability — to take this all the way to the Supreme Court,” he said.

Mr. Sprayregen said he had spent $500,000 so far, including hiring a lobbyist and Norman Siegel, a civil liberties lawyer.

His wealth does not seem to be a match for Columbia, according to city records. During the past two years, the university paid nearly $1.2 million to some of the city’s most powerful lobbying firms — including Bolton-St. Johns, Greenberg Traurig, and Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel — to push for the rezoning. Columbia officials say that figure includes legal fees.

The targets of their efforts included Deputy Mayor Daniel L. Doctoroff, Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn, Borough President Scott M. Stringer and Councilman Robert Jackson, whose district includes Manhattanville.

In recent weeks, Mr. Sprayregen said, he has talked with the university about trading his buildings inside the expansion zone for university property outside the zone. Columbia would not comment on Thursday about those discussions.

“What’s the need for the threat of eminent domain?” he asked. “It’s not like I’m standing in the way of a highway or a train track.”
Ray Rivera contributed reporting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/nyregion/21columbia.html?ref=nyregion

Sprayregen's No Custer

2007-12-21T13:26:00.000-05:00

The Neighborhood Retail Alliance
Protecting Neighborhood Business For Over 20 Years
Friday, December 21, 2007

Sprayregen's No Custer

In this morning's NY Times, the paper focuses on the last remaining property owners who are holding out against the university's expansion. Nick Sprayregen, Anne Whitman and company are portrayed as the Last of the Mohicans, with a little bit of General Custer as well.

What the paper's missing, is that these holdouts pose a real threat, and if good faith bargaining isn't going to take place, Columbia's plans are gonna be put into a delaying pattern that will frustrate all of the folks who're looking to get to work on the expansion. As Whitman says; “No way Columbia is going to steal this property right out from underneath me,” Ms. Whitman said in August 2006. “Remember that man who stood in front of the tank at Tiananmen Square? That’s me.”

Sprayregen feels the same: "He has vowed that he will spend as much money as it takes to keep the university from getting his property via eminent domain. On one of his buildings hangs a giant banner, reading “Stop Eminent Domain Abuse!” that is visible to riders on the No. 1 subway line through Harlem. “This isn’t about money, I’m fighting them over principle — I strongly believe the use of eminent domain here is wrong,” said Mr. Sprayregen, who said he has finished 20 marathons but has stopped running in order to devote more time to battling the university. “I have the strong desire — and the financial ability — to take this all the way to the Supreme Court,” he said.

"It really behooves everyone involved to get real negotiations going-and our conversations with all of the key local officials indicates that this will happen soon; with even ESDC apparently interested in avoiding a widely publicized and messy legal battle. As Sprayregen told the Times: "In recent weeks, Mr. Sprayregen said, he has talked with the university about trading his buildings inside the expansion zone for university property outside the zone. Columbia would not comment on Thursday about those discussions."

While it's unfortunate that property rights aren't of much concern to the City Council leadership, the impediment that these intrepid folks pose to the city's vision of progress is the incentive that will generate the kind of dialogue that can only lead to a win for all involved. In the end, we believe the city and Columbia will deal, and the folks of West Harlem just might get a measure of equity as a result.

That being said, the Columbia ED fight will be seen as a tempest in a tea pot when compared to the battle over Willets Point; where over 200 businesses and thousands of immigrant workers are at risk. As the NY Daily News points out this morning: "The battle over Columbia University's expansion plan has ended in the City Council. But the bigger war over eminent domain may be just getting started."

Which is going to put Christine Quinn directly in the spotlight, as she continues her metamorphosis from community activist to, well we're not really sure. As she told the News: "Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan) offered that eminent domain "should be used carefully and cautiously, and it should only by used when there is an overriding greater good in the interest of the city." What we do know, is that there's a certain townhouse on 79th Street that will never face the ED bulldozer.

# posted by Neighborhood Retail Alliance @ 9:07 AM

http://momandpopnyc.blogspot.com/2007/12/sprayregens-no-custer.html

Saving Black Culture in Harlem

2007-12-20T21:25:00.000-05:00

New York
Amsterdam News

Saving Black Culture in Harlem
by ALTON H. MADDOX JR.
Amsterdam News
Originally posted 12/20/2007

If you plot points on a graph connecting the Alexandria Library in Kemet to Black Wall Street in Tulsa to the defunct Central High School in Newnan, GA, you will find a common thread: European destruction of African achievements. Black and white
institutions are prohibited from co-existing on equal terms.

White supremacy will not have it any other way. Blacks must always be subservient
to whites. All trace evidence of African genius has to be destroyed. See, for example, Amos Wilson’s "Awakening the Natural Genius of Black Children." At birth, Black children are ready for the world, but white supremacy is not ready for them.

Under the pretext that it needs to acquire neighboring lands to fulfill its ethnocentric mission, Columbia University is designing another land grab. One of the targets is the Cotton Club which is located on a narrow tract of land on 125th Street. Unless 125th Street is about to be closed permanently from 125th Street to the Westside Highway, no rational reason exists for Columbia to grab the Cotton Club.

Columbia’s aim is to stamp out Harlem’s Black identity. Around the world, people
associate the Cotton Club with Black culture. The Japanese has already established
a Cotton Club, on choice real estate, in Tokyo. The Chinese has a similar vision. A
cultural exchange program connects one people with another people. Columbia
intends to kill two birds with one stone.

Racism has always been the guiding light for land use in New York City. Blacks in
New York were emancipated in 1827. Afterwards, many Blacks resided in Seneca
Village. By 1857, all Blacks in the village had been evicted without due process of
law. The evictions were designed to replace a residential village with Central Park.
This was the first case of "Negro removal" in the United States.

Mayor Fernando Wood presided over the eviction of our ancestors from Seneca
Village in Manhattan. He was also the city’s chief defender of slavery and a rabid
racist. New York City was dependent on the South’s cotton trade and was in support
of the aims and ambitions of the Confederate States of America.

Wood became the leader of the Copperheads, who urged the Lincoln Administration
to let the South "go in peace." They called for "peace without victory." The slogan of the Copperheads became "the Constitution as it is, the Union as it was and the
Negroes where they are." Frederick Douglass strenuously opposed the
Copperheads. He advocated an end to slavery.

The 1821 New York Constitutional Convention gave unbridled suffrage to white
males while imposing harsh conditions on Black males who sought the same
privilege. They had to own real property. Racial pogroms ran most Blacks out of New
York City by the 1860’s under the banner of the Democratic Party.

The common thread that connected 1857 with 2007 is the Democratic Party, which
has always been pro-slavery. The eviction plan in the 1850’s not only displaced
Blacks but it also disenfranchised Black males. New York City Council today is still
controlled by the Democratic Party.

Title I of the Housing Act of 1949 was designed to replace the slums of New York
with middle class housing. Instead, New York City used the funds to give the poor the
boot and to use the property for high-rent apartments, medical centers and university
campuses. Columbia University was a prime beneficiary of the law to the detriment of
the poor.

Before World War II, Columbia University and the Rockefellers hit the panic button
when Blacks and Puerto Ricans were spotted on Claremont Ave. near Columbia.
Imaginary lines were drawn to prevent any further migration of historically-despised
persons to areas near Columbia University and Riverside Church.

Columbia University has acquired the resources to expand north of 125th Street in a
manner consistent with maintaining the world-class status of the university. At a
minimum, New York City must maintain a containment policy for non-whites. A white
minority in the city fashions public policy. This is minority-rule.

The Cotton Club is a threat to the "pristine" image of Columbia University. Diversity
has never been a part of the university’s repertoire. King’s College was born during
slavery in New York. Its name was changed, in 1912, to Columbia University in the
City of New York. The school has always been at war with Blacks. Recently, nooses
were displayed at Columbia.

With its proposed expansion north of 125th Street, Columbia fears that the Cotton
Club will attract Black patrons to the area. White clubs exist on Broadway and
Amsterdam in Morningside Heights, but they mostly attract white patrons. Blacks in
Morningside Heights stick out like sore thumbs.

According to the Selig Center, the projected buying power of Blacks in the United
States will be $1.1 trillion in 2011. Only 9 countries exceed the buying power of
Blacks in the United States. The buying power of Blacks in New York exceeds by far
any other "minority group." This city would collapse without Black dollars.
If Blacks were recycling dollars in the Black community, the economic clout of Black
businesses would be awesome. If Black institutions made a concerted effort to
patronize Black establishments, it would not only strengthen our economic position in

New York City but also allow for political representation.

While we may still be attempting to resolve the conumbrum of which came first the
chicken or the egg, we do know that economics preceded politics. Economics can
operate without politics, but politics is unable to operate without economics. Blacks
are putting their eggs in the wrong basket.

Cong. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr.’s strength came not only from the Abyssinian Baptist
Church but also from Black businesses. Politics is a protections racket. Laws are
enacted daily to protect white dollars. Black dollars are like Black people. They have no protection. We are entitled to voting rights but not political representation.

History should not be repeating itself in 2007. Without our dollars, New York City
would have to go down on its knees and the Black vote in New York City is critical to
state and presidential politics. The Democratic Party must secure the state’s electoral votes. For 2008, marching should take a back seat to the strategic withholding of our dollars and our votes.

Unfortunately, history is repeating itself because we refuse to leverage Black dollars and Black votes. Instead, we prefer to follow leaders who use their feet with police approval. What’s in our hands? Apparently nothing is of any value or so we think.

Our revered ancestors had few dollars and no votes. We have both but our minds are
firmly entrenched in the hands of our oppressors. There are more than two million
human robots in New York City. During slavery, their ancestors were headless. See
"The Miseducation of the Negro."

Culture is the glue that binds economics and politics. The role of economics and
politics is to protect culture. A people without culture is like a tree without roots.

We must unearth our culture and, afterwards, we must use politics and economics to
sustain it.

If we are unable to unearth our culture, cultural hegemony will continue to allow those with power to give orders to those without it. This arrangement is having a
devastating impact on the powerless and, in the case of Blacks, this arrangement
suppresses Black consciousness. Blacks can ill-afford to lose Harlem and its cultural
institutions.

December 26 - Kwanzaa Celebration to show appreciation for the sacrificial works of
Drs. Rosalind and Leonard Jeffries at the Elks Plaza, 1068 Harriet Tubman (Fulton
Street) nr. Classon Ave. in Brooklyn at 7:30 p.m. Come out and honor them. Take the
"C" train to Franklin Ave.

Jan. 5 - UAM’s Annual Kwanzaa Breakfast at the Cotton Club, 656 West 125th St. in
Harlem from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Jan. 19 - UAM’s Annual Membership Dance at Cotton Club, 656 West 125th St. in
Harlem from 9:00 p.m.

For further information call United African Movement at 718-834-9034.
See: http://www.reinstatealtonmaddox.net/ for "Freedom Retreat 2008," and "Letter to the
Daily News re Stanley Crouch,"
12/18/07

http://www.amsterdamnews.com/News/article/article.asp?NewsID=84832&sID=34

The Columbia Vote

2007-12-20T19:44:00.000-05:00

The Columbia Vote

December 20th, 2007

For the City Council, a 35 to 5 to 6 vote is a divisive one (the body usually votes in one block unanimously behind Speaker Christine Quinn).

But yesterday’s approval of Columbia University’s 17-acre West Harlem expansion, estimated to cost $7 billion, was one that brought out catcalls and claws - well, for the usually compliant City Council, anyway.

Members questioned the timing of the expansion’s approval, which had a Jan. 15th deadline and many expected to occur after the New Year. Others disapproved of the application because the Ivy League institution has not ruled out the possibility of eminent domain for commercial properties to make way for the Manhattanville campus. And others still harbor resentment over Columbia hosting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Here is a list of those who dissented and those who abstained as well as the reasoning they spouted on the Council Chamber floor yesterday. Those without reasons didn’t specify any.

Councilmember Tony Avella (no): “If we approve this knowing that eminent domain could be used down the road, no one’s property is safe… This is supposed to be the people’s house, not Columbia’s house.”

Councilmember Charles Barron (no): “What happened in the last few days was a rush.”

Councilmember Lewis Fidler (no): “I think a college campus is where we consume the highest and the best ideas. When it comes to that test Columbia University has failed. They invited to their campus a hate monger, a homophobe, a holocaust denier and they gave him a platform of credibility which I think is shameful.”

Councilmember Vincent Ignizio (no): “I think this is an abuse of government power… Be very concerned about what you do, because the bullets you put in the gun of government today when pointed at somebody else may one day be pointed at you.”

Councilmember Letitia James (no): “It’s just yet another example of the threat and or the abuse of eminent domain. Your house today. My house tomorrow. Columbia University and the community would be much better served were they to integrate rather than dominate, swallow, subjugate or control the neighboring community… I say to residents, don’t worry you’ll join Brooklyn, and we’ll see them in court.”

Councilmember Helen Foster (abstained): “Having been familiar with an organization that has been unfriendly to a community and then once they want something makes all the promises in the world, I am suspect. ”

Councilmember Eric Gioia (abstained): “If you respect property, you have to respect property rights - for the big guy and the little guy.”

Councilmember Rosie Mendez (abstained)

Councilmember Hiram Monserrate (abstained)

Councilmember Peter Vallone (abstained): “I do have some serious problems with eminent domain used in this matter. But in deference to Councilmember Jackson, Dickens and Katz, I will abstain.

Councilmember Thomas White (abstained)

By Courtney Gross on December 20, 2007, 4:55 pm

In category: Community Development, Land Use, Education, Gotham City

Recommend this entry via: stumble upon digg del.icio.us

One Response to “The Columbia Vote”
New Yorker Says: December 21st, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Thank’s to term limits - most of the unprincipled cowards and sell-outs on the city council will be gone. It is time for a 180 degree turn around. The people of this city must be heard and respected. We are being pushed against the wall. It won’t be long before we push back with the awesome and devestating power of the people.

http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2007/12/20/the-columbia-vote/

RANGEL LEGISLATION PROVIDES RELIEF TO CO-OPS - UP-DATE Press Reports That The President has Signed Today HR 3648

2007-12-20T14:34:00.000-05:00

From: Garcia, Elbert
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 5:05 PM
To: rangelmedia@yahoo.com
Subject: RANGEL LEGISLATION PROVIDES RELIEF TO CO-OPS

The Press Reports that President Bush has Today Signed HR 3648
Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:30:42 -0500

Therefore New 80/20 provisions are effective for the tax year 2007.

PRESS RELEASE
CONGRESSMAN CHARLES RANGEL

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ............... December 19, 2007

Contact: Emile Milne 202-225-4365
Elbert Garcia 212-663-3900

RANGEL LEGISLATION PROVIDES RELIEF TO CO-OPS

Provision would allow housing cooperatives to determine commercial rents
without sacrificing tax benefits to shareholders

WASHINGTON - Thanks to the efforts of Congressman Charles B. Rangel, hundreds of housing cooperatives boards in New York City will now have greater flexibility in the rent they charge commercial tenants.

Included in a recently passed Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 (HR 3648) is a measure that allows co-ops to determine commercial rents without the fear that the additional income would disqualify owners from deducting their proportionate share of the building's mortgage interest and taxes. Under current law, co-ops are limited to charging commercial tenants rents that do not total more than 20 percent of the building's total income from rents and cooperator maintenance payments.

Rangel was happy to see that Congress could come together to resolve such a longstanding issue.

"I am extremely pleased that the tax code will treat people who live in co-operative housing the same way as homeowners and condo owners are treated when it comes to their renting out part of their property," said Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. "I hope that this will provide relief from for some from the high housing costs in New York."

Co-ops would be allowed to pass through applicable tax benefits if they meet one of three requirements:

1) If 80 percent or more of the co-op's gross income is from the tenant stockholders

2) If 80 percent of the total square footage of the building is used or for residential purposes.

3) If 90% of the costs of operating the building are for the benefit of the tenant stockholders.

Rangel thanked a number of groups, including the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums, for their support and assistance in helping to tackle this issue.

"By working with advocates and industry groups, we were able to craft legislation that made sense to both sides of the political aisle," said Rangel. "Thanks to the hard work of many, the federal government will be able to provide some relief to families as they struggle with the rising living costs."

The co-op provision included in HR 3648 is part of a larger piece of legislation that was crafted as part of a response to the current subprime mortgage crisis. The legislation would provide relief by permanently excluding debt forgiven under these circumstances from tax liability. It would also help would-be homeowners secure their investments through an extension of the tax deduction for private mortgage insurance, and would ease restrictions for qualifying as housing cooperative corporations.

Amended by the Senate last week, The Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 is expected to be signed by President Bush later this week.

City Council OKs Columbia's move into West Harlem

2007-12-20T09:51:00.000-05:00

From: "Ruth Eisenberg"
To: "Jordi Reyes-Montblanc"
Subject: AP coverage
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:34:22 -0500

Newsday.com
City Council clears way for Columbia University expansion
8:42 PM EST, December 19, 2007

NEW YORK (AP) _ The City Council voted Wednesday to allow Columbia University's much-debated expansion into West Harlem, where it plans to establish new laboratories, housing and other facilities.

In a 35-5 vote, with six members abstaining, the council lifted the last significant hurdle in the rezoning of an area that currently holds a mix of apartments, warehouses, auto repair shops and small factories, many of which would be razed under the university's plan.

Opponents have claimed that the university is being insensitive to the history of the community and that the project will displace poor, minority families that have long struggled to earn a living there.

But university officials maintain the project is essential if the cramped school is to remain competitive with other top institutions. It currently has half the space of Harvard University and a third that of Princeton and Yale.

"We have arrived at a significant turning point on the matter of space for the university to grow together with our communities," university president Lee Bollinger said in a statement. "The long-term opportunities for Columbia and the people who live and work in our community and our city are barely imaginable to us at this early moment."

Critics promised continued opposition to the plan.

"We're going to stop it in the streets," said Ruth Eisenberg, a member of opposition group Coalition to Preserve Community. "As the outrage of the community becomes more obvious, it's going to be very hard to go forward."

The university's $7 billion plan calls for new buildings for the arts, business and science and a public high school on 17 acres north of the existing upper Manhattan campus. Forceful objections to the program drove the school to temper some of its more ambitious projects, reducing the height of 26- and 24-story buildings by as much as half.

The school has said it would bolster affordable housing in the community as part of its plan. In September, it agreed to donate $20 million to an affordable-housing fund and spend at least $12 million on public parks and playgrounds.

It remains unclear whether Columbia will attempt to use eminent domain to secure commercial properties owned by people who have refused to sell. The school already owns about three-quarters of the property in the area.

Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/ny-nycolu205508307dec20,0,4809526.story

Columbia Pulls a Kelo

2007-12-20T07:35:00.000-05:00

December 20, 2007 Edition > Section: Opinion >

Columbia Pulls a Kelo
BY MICHAEL WHITE

December 20, 2007

URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/68407

In a City Council hearing this week I pointed out something our politicians already know: New York has an eminent domain industry and it's thriving.

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects private property from being taken by eminent domain, says that property can only be taken for "public use." And while the language of the constitution remains the same, the interpretation has changed.

Once upon a time, "eminent domain" meant private property could only be taken for public use, for things such as roads or public parks. Now, it is possible for to take property from one private owner and give it to another — if public officials endorse that the shift will be for the "public good." Needless to say, the condemnation industry is busy.

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court upheld interpretations of eminent domain used for urban redevelopment schemes that force changes in private ownership in the name of "public good." The Castle Coalition, a project of the Institute for Justice, has startling before-and-after statistics showing that since Kelo v. City of New London there has been a several-fold increase in new condemnations and new proposals of eminent domain nationwide.

This is a flood of private commercial development. In testimony before the New York Senate Judiciary Committee, the Castle Coalition offered that New York has the "unfortunate distinction" of being one of the "very worst states in the country in abusing the power of eminent domain."

In New York, eminent domain can be conducted by obscure agencies where accountability isn't transparent. Too few citizens understand Governor Spitzer's responsibility for the persisting political purchase Atlantic Yards has had on its peculiar life. Most know little about the Urban Development Corporation, doing business as the Empire State Development Corporation, which frequently operates through the creation of lesser-known subsidiaries.

Most don't know that a private owner who covets the property of another can, outside the scrutiny of the public eye, start the condemnation process by writing a check to the self-funding government agency — to finance costs, including government staff salaries — so that agency will put together materials advancing the condemnation. In that vein, Columbia University, interested in acquiring a swath of West Harlem, wrote a $300,000 starter check to ESDC in 2004, years before any public hearings.

Eminent domain is often preceded by the notion that someone partaking in the acquisition process sees "blight." And blight, if it is not readily in the imagining eyes of beholders, is something that those pursuing an eminent domain taking of property can create. They can do this by various means, including the "threat" of eminent domain.

As seen particularly with Columbia and also with Atlantic Yards, the threat of eminent domain is used quite as destructively as eminent domain itself. This is done even when there has been no public vote or decision to use eminent domain. In July 2004, Anne Whitman wanted to keep the historic building she had owned for 35 years, but Columbia wrote "the nature and scope of the current development plan make that impossible." Thirty-seven threatened neighborhood owners sold to Columbia even though eminent domain has never been authorized.

One reason eminent domain is now being manipulated by powerful private entities such Columbia University and Forest City Enterprises, run by developer Bruce Ratner, is that they feel confident that when they initiate the process, they will be the recipient of property taken. That is because bids or effective bidding is not being required.

It is not in the industry's interest to depict with neutral accuracy what eminent domain will bring — including environmental impacts. The expensive brochures, full of customary pretty pictures and selectively chosen "facts" about proposed projects, cannot be excused as more puffery.

The tools that wrest ownership from others do harm. Shunning transparency, Columbia, like Mr. Ratner, collects gag orders forbidding any sellers to talk even to family members. Meanwhile the industry sidesteps process and public reviews such as the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure ("ULURP").

Though eminent domain is supposed to be permissible in pursuit of the "public good," condemnation is pursued even when local communities don't concur that there is such "public good." Neither the Columbia expansion nor Atlantic Yards would be proceeding as planned if local community boards were listened to.

Nothing as staggering as Columbia's takeover of West Harlem would be allowed were it another institution in another neighborhood, just as nothing comparable to Atlantic Yards would have been accepted in a Manhattan neighborhood like Greenwich Village.

That doesn't mean that neighborhoods better represented and closer to the seats of power are safe from eminent domain abuse. The industry will continue to push the envelope as far as it respectively can. What transpires in brownstone Brooklyn and West Harlem will pave the way for abuse in the neighborhoods of Lenox Hill or Gramercy Park.

Mr. White, a real estate development, housing, and public finance attorney, holds a masters degree in urban planning.

December 20, 2007 Edition > Section: Opinion > Printer-Friendly Version

City Council Approves Columbia Expansion Plan

2007-12-19T21:53:00.000-05:00

City Room

December 19, 2007, 5:57 pm

City Council Approves Columbia Expansion Plan
By Sewell Chan

A map showing Columbia University’s expansion plan. Click to enlarge.
After an unusually lengthy debate, the New York City Council cleared the way for a 17-acre campus expansion by Columbia University, the largest in its history.

The 35 to 5 vote, with 6 members abstaining, followed a hectic day of committee meetings and was the final significant step in a rezoning process that pitted the university and its supporters against a coalition that included the local community board and some property owners and residents.

The expansion, encompassing the area between 125th and 133rd Streets, from Broadway west to the Hudson River, would mark the greatest change in Columbia’s footprint since the 1890s, when it moved from Midtown to Morningside Heights.

The university intends to build new academic and residential buildings, including space for its arts and business schools and advanced scientific research labs.

The $7 billion expansion, which will occur over the next 25 years, will be the largest development project in Manhattan in recent memory. Columbia has said it intends to extend its campus onto only 17 acres, which are bounded roughly by Broadway on the east, the Hudson River on the west, West 125 th Street on the south and West 133rd Street on the north.

While the rezoning of the area from light manufacturing to mixed-use removes the university’s last hurdle to expand, some elements of the plan remain to be settled — including whether the university will seek to use eminent domain to remove commercial property owners who have so far refused to sell their land to Columbia.

The university owns about 75 percent of the property in the area. The expansion has been bitterly opposed by many in West Harlem, who have objected to the potential use of eminent domain, and out of fear that the residents of some of the last working class neighborhoods in Manhattan, which lie to the north of the expansion area, will be displaced by students and administrators who earn far more than the typical neighborhood resident.

But Columbia officials said the expansion was necessary if the institution, cramped for space, was to remain competitive with its Ivy League peers, several of which are either in the midst of expanding or are considering expanding.

”Columbia has only a fraction of the space enjoyed by our leading peers across the country,” said Lee C. Bollinger, president of the university.

Columbia completed a draft environmental impact statement for the project in June, but the criticism had begun much earlier.

The expansion plan was sharply criticized at a public hearing in October and was one focus of a student hunger strike in November. As part of the real estate boom, colleges and universities have been erecting new buildings around the city, straining town-gown relations.

The City Planning Commission endorsed the expansion on Nov. 26 after a contentious debate.

Comments (39)
Government & Politics, Buildings and Landmarks, Higher Education, Land Use and Planning, City Council, Columbia University, Harlem, Lee C. Bollinger
Related
Planning Panel Approves Columbia Expansion
A Week Into the Columbia Hunger Strike
When the Gown Devours the Town
Columbia Again Defends Its Expansion Plan
-->
39 comments so far...

1. December 19th,20076:23 pm
It’s wonderful news for the entire city, for Columbia, and for especially Manhattanville — a blighted area that desperately needs a facelict.
— Posted by Steven M.

2. December 19th,20076:24 pm
“The expansion has been bitterly opposed by many in West Harlem, who have objected to the potential use of eminent domain, and out of fear that the residents of some of the last working class neighborhoods in Manhattan, which lie to the north of the expansion area, will be displaced by students and administrators who earn far more than the typical neighborhood resident.”

This is the reason why they should let them build higher and larger on those 17 acres so that there’d be enough room to fit those students and admininstrators in instead of having some go into the neighboring area and displace the current residents there. However, as usual, shortsighted New Yorkers are afraid of tall buildings and so the displacement will have to happen.
— Posted by Eric

3. December 19th,20076:25 pm
I, along with my family, are the largest private property owners in Manhattanville fighting Columbia’s continued threat of using the state’s “police power” to take our property, (and property of others as well) against our will merely because Columbia wants it.

Although the rezoning that was passsed today is a positive act for a community that has not been allowed to grow organically due to antiquated zoning regulations, today also marks a significant step in Columbia’s continued trampling of New Yorkers’ civil rights. If Columbia is allowed to use eminent domain here, it will open the floodgates for more and more abusive and totally unnecessary campaigns by large organizations to take the property from the rest of us.
Columbia may be in a gleeful mood tonight; however the fight over right and wrong will continue tomorrow.
— Posted by Nick Sprayregen

4. December 19th,20076:34 pm
how is this democracy?this is theft. outright.amazing…west, central and east harlem ought to unite, and the whole city.shame on c.u. and the council.
— Posted by John

5. December 19th,20076:35 pm
Hopefully with this approval, a long-awaited renewal can begin in Manhattanville, a depressed area zoned “manufacturing” that has not manufactured anything in decades. Columbia urgently needs the additional space for teaching, research, and the new public math and science high school. The region needs the long-term investment that only an entity like Columbia can provide. I hope today is the start of a new era of growth and prosperity for Columbia — and New York, Sam.
— Posted by Sam

6. December 19th,20076:54 pm
I just wonder how much these “community leaders” extorted from Columbia in set asides to let this plan go through. There is no question that our city will be far better off with an expanded Columbia than with the structures that are currently there.
— Posted by Camilo

7. December 19th,20077:04 pm
How can they possibly justify using eminent domain in this case?
— Posted by Ken

8. December 19th,20077:11 pm
I think this is an excellent opportunity for Columbia to expand and is necessary for the city’s future prosperity.
— Posted by j

9. December 19th,20077:21 pm
Eric has it exactly right. Columbia ought to be encouraged to build higher, and that goes for much of the development in the city, but NY’ers seem to have a bizarre allergy to tall buildings, despite living in a city of skyscrapers.

However, this is no more “theft” than is the govt taxing me and using those funds to pay social benefits that I don’t receive. Most non-anarchists would agree that local governments do have the occasional need to infringe on private property rights, as much as this is not ideal, for example with regard to zoning and other such regulations. Also, “theft” does not mean the seizure of property in exchange for cash, the last time I checked. ED may be controversial, but theft means you get nothing back, and this is obviously not the case.
Hooray for West Harlem and for Columbia, and for NYC. Great news.
— Posted by Sam

10. December 19th,20077:22 pm
I applaud the council on a wise decision. Hopefully Mayor Bloomberg will sign this without too much delay and the construction can start! 25 years constitute a long time. The sooner we start, the better. As a current student, I don’t think I’ll be able to directly benefit from it before I graduate as an MD/PhD; nonetheless, countless other people will. But perhaps, in the coming quarter century, as a resident, professor, or life-long student I will, as well. Bravo, Columbia. Roar, Lion, ROAR !!
— Posted by Dr Dave

11. December 19th,20077:24 pm
I was an actor (and unusually, frequently employed) who lived at 125 and Bway for a few years, sharing a small apartment with a friend in a stinking corner of a the city, because we could afford nothing more. I am delighted to hear that the nation’s wealthiest children will have an expanded campus (and undoubtedly remove my friend who still lives there) in their pursuit of knowledge and trust-fund enabled self-indulgence! Yeah for Columbia and the wealthiest among us!
— Posted by Tony Wichowski

12. December 19th,20077:28 pm
It’s an abuse of eminent domain. Even council members voting for the plan today didn’t argue that it was a legitimate use of eminent domain, they just somehow were able to overlook governmental abuse of power.

I applaud Nick for standing up for his fifth amendment rights and identifying himself on this board in doing so. (unlike the CU cheerleading squad)
Just like Atlantic Yards, this political approval of the Columbia expansion does not mean the state can take his property and hand it over to Columbia.

First the ESDC has to give its approval, which no doubt it will. Then the courts will have to approve. Then, as Nick posts above, right will win out.
— Posted by Daniel Goldstein

13. December 19th,20077:31 pm
Eminent domain is not a ‘police power’, it is a constitutional power (5th amendment) and has been affirmed by multiple Supreme Court rulings. Moreover, the welfare of the state and other citizens may sometimes take precedence over the right of a tiny minority. For example, zoning laws and noise ordinances restrict the ability of private property owners to make use of their land, and no one objects to those. In some states, owners of ‘public forum’ commercial property (malls, etc) are required to allow free speech even if they disagree with it. Property rights are not absolute, and they are not ‘natural’ rights. You were not born with a right to buy land and own property in the same way you were born with the right to think and speak freely. These rights are given, and can be limited by, the state.
— Posted by David

14. December 19th,20077:40 pm
Nick Spayregren,
Are you responsible for any of the billboards that are visible from the neighborhood, the waterfront, and the gateway into Manhattan? How is it that they are permitted when NYC has a law banning billboards near parks and parkways? Sympathetic to your cause, but must admit that Columbia might improve the public aesthetics.
— Posted by CK

15. December 19th,20077:42 pm
To Commentors 4 & 7:
The Council did not approve the use of eminent domain, and was not even asked to do so. It voted to modify some zoning ordinances and to allow Columbia to build on land it owns. Columbia may never need to resort to eminent domain, and today’s vote does not give it that power. There will have to be other votes in the future before this can happen.

To Commenter 11:
Columbia has very comprehensive financial aid programs, and many of its students are fully subsidized. Calling it an institution for the rich only proves that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
— Posted by CU Alum

16. December 19th,20077:45 pm
OK– the site has been gobbled up and rezoned by the city cuncil. What will be lost– many long standing small businesses, La Floridita, people’s homes, art and performance spaces, Dinosaur BBQ, and one of the more modern MTA bus garages in the city. And who is going to have to pay to rebuild that elsewhere? Is Columbia going to pay to replace it? What will happen to the people who live there? Big projects like Yankee Stadium and Columbia always promises “jobs” but somehow these never materialize for the people who live and work in the neighborhood and who will now be displaced.
— Posted by karen

17. December 19th,20077:46 pm
The place is a dump. It’s about time development proceeded. Columbia’s activities are bound to generate more employment than what is there now. Hopefully, Columbia can work with what it owns and the city will hold back on the use of eminent domain. Rents in the area may increase, it’s true. On the other hand, when you live in a blighted area, what you don’t pay in rent, you pay in being victimized by crime or in fear of it, and in lousy public education. Living in a slum is rarely the great bargain that some young, strong, single males portray it to be.
— Posted by Kevin

18. December 19th,20077:49 pm
As a graduate student at Columbia, I’m glad that Columbia has had its expansion plan approved. I will graduate before any of the new campus is completed, but I’m glad that Columbia will have the space to grow and remain a premier research institution. This is great news for the neighborhood and higher education.
— Posted by John C.

19. December 19th,20077:54 pm
This is a wonderful thing for the City and Columbia. Eminent domain is entirely appropriate to achieve this public good. Columbia is a point of pride for New York City and should be allowed to do what it needs to remain competitive in the Ivy League. It is also a great public good for land to be used for its highest and best use.
— Posted by Marc

20. December 19th,20077:54 pm
Those who REALLY see the big picture know that this is only one of many steps being taken by the powers that be to eliminate the cultural fabric of Harlem. What a great way to start the New Year.
— Posted by LT

21. December 19th,20077:56 pm
In the case of Columbia, the New York State and New York City governments are planning on using eminent domain to ‘force’ private commercial property owners to sell their land. Eminent domain is only used when the result of private property seizure is necessary for the greater good. Columbia University and its many employees perform not-for-profit research for the public good, serving causes that benefit many. The few people that are refusing to sell are private commercial property owners who are for-profit entreprenuers whose work involves making money for themselves. Columbia’s expansion and the not-yet-employed use of eminent domain are a perfect example of necessary government intervention in order to overcome those concerned solely for themselves for the greater public good.
— Posted by Mark

22. December 19th,20078:02 pm
This is exciting. Let’s hope Colmbia graces NYC with some spectacular architecture. With it’s neurosciences institute and arts expansion, we can be sure that Columbia will continue to make great contributions to NYC, the US and the world.
Congratulations
— Posted by alumna

23. December 19th,20078:04 pm
Whatever ramifications Kelo etc. may have in terms of whether or not Columbia can secure this land through eminent domain seems to me beside the point. The point, to paraphrase Jeff Goldblum’s character in Jurassic Park, is that we spend so much time asking could we that we neglect to ask whether we should.

I am deeply concerned about the massive displacement and cultural and economic dislocation which will result from handing half of west harlem over to an elite, unionbusting, private university that once, not so long ago, attempted to stick a de facto segregated gymnasium in the middle of Morningside Park.

As i understand it, this expansion is a science campus, where Columbia, thanks to the Bayh-Dole act, will be able to reap profits from licensing research and patents to Biotech, Pharmaceutical, and other industries while the folks who have sustained harlem and made it such an important and historic center of black life in this country get pushed further and further to the periphery of a neighborhood already gentrifying at a rapid rate.
Who does this expansion serve? And at whose expense does this sort of growth come?
— Posted by Zach

24. December 19th,20078:12 pm
I understand the 5th amendment statement but to counter … is a private university’s interests constitute the betterment of the “state.” A large taxpayer should then employ a similar measure to tear down pre-existing companies that block his/her view of oceanfront property. A nation built on legal precedents and common law treads begins the trek down a dark path of privilege, power, and wealth.

The same technology that has “flattened the world” (Friedman) has the opportunity to redefine the college environment. Redefine the nature of a contiguous campus. Rethink the space that exists on campus.
— Posted by Lane

25. December 19th,20078:20 pm
Just a little informal survey….
Out of those who oppose the expansion plan, how many of you would be willing to take a walk through the area in question, alone, at 2 AM on a Saturday morning? Now, how many of the women?
— Posted by Evan

26. December 19th,20078:20 pm
Commentor 16:
Businesses that rent their premises get evicted when their landlords want to redevelop. I agree that it’s sad, but it’s also reality and there is nothing unique about Columbia’s plan in this regard. Also, the only performance space I know in the area is the re-created Cotton Club, which is going to remain where it is; in fact, the new facilities will vastly increase the performance space in the area. Columbia has agreed to re-locate Dinosaur BBQ in one of the new buildings. It may do likewise for La Floridita, though I have no information on this point.

Only a small number of people live in the expansion zone, and Columbia has promised not to evict them if they don’t want to leave. It has also promised to build better housing for them in the immediate neighborhood, and most will probably accept a deal it offers and will move out voluntarily. Given that the four residential buildings are on one of the last parcels Columbia plans to develop (twenty or more years from now), many of the units will have opened up due to normal attrition by then anyway.

I agree that the MTA bus depot is an issue. I’m sure that if the MTA agrees to sell it will set the price partly according to what it will cost to build or buy an adequate replacement facility nearby.
— Posted by CU Alum

27. December 19th,20078:24 pm
This is a disgrace. There is nothing new about Columbia being elitist and greedy. They have systematically evicted the working classes for years in an effort to compete with other universities.

They do not give back to the neighborhood at all, and should have been stopped. I happen to own here in Morningside Heights and will not be displaced, but I resent being surrounded by a bunch of spoiled and entitled brats.
— Posted by Harlemite

28. December 19th,20078:28 pm
Social justice is about respecting the rights of citizens regardless of the power they wield or checks they write.
— Posted by D. Foley

29. December 19th,20078:33 pm
To Zach (#24):
How is a mere 17 acres “half of West Harlem”? And given that hardly any of the 17 acres is residential, how will Columbia’s expansion have the dramatic impact on residents that you predict?

The new construction is not going to be “a science campus”. It will include some science and engineering buildings, but it will also include Columbia’s schools of business, arts and international affairs, along with residential buildings, support facilities, administrative offices and retail space. Further, the money Columbia makes from its patents is spent on more research, not reaped as “profits” the way you describe.

Who does the expansion serve? Frankly, it serves everyone who benefits from the scientific, cultural and artistic developments that will spring from the new facilities and from the new educational opportunities Columbia will be able to offer. In other words, it will benefit just about everyone.
— Posted by Ed

30. December 19th,20078:36 pm
Under the Community Board’s Recommendation’s Columbia University could have expanded, met its needs for the future, provided the for all of the benefits they claim will accrue from their expansion including the creation of jobs. They could have done this without using eminent domain to seize private property, without destroying historic structures and without exposing the community to unknown environmental problem. Under the plan as approved, Columbia will not only displace the three private property owners but the dozens of enterprises located in their properties and in the properties already owned by the University. Alternatives could have been found that would have avoided losing the 100’s of jobs that already exist in the area. The use of eminent domain was a choice based on hubris and power and not on need since alternatives to expand existed and were put forward by the Community Board who did not oppose Columbia’s expansion. They opposed how Columbia chose to expand. The Council’s rush to judgement did not give the Council members the time to learn about these alternatives and about the economic and environmental costs of the proposal. The community, the students and all New Yorkers are the losers as a result of this expedited process.
— Posted by Ron Shiffman

31. December 19th,20078:49 pm
wow. so many responses. great to see - this is a topic that many “feel” about. It is unfortunate though that many who are critical of my statements, (see above) or those of others in the community, are not informed enough, (not fault of theirs though), to really understand how what this institution is doing is so wrong.

For those who are critical of the area as being unsafe, poor, “blighted”, what they dont take into account is zoning. Until…today, Manhattanville was zoned for manufacuring. Period. The end. Where do those who are critical think service stations, gas stations, and, yes, self storage . warehouses are going to go - Park Ave and 57th St? I dont think so.

and for those who are supportive of CU for advancing other “great” ideals, most of our community are NOT against the expansion. Only against the heavy handed threats of this institution. There is enough to share. More than enough. However, Columbia wants it all. All. Not right. Wrong.
More later…
— Posted by nick sprayregen

32. December 19th,20078:57 pm
To commenter 15:
I was admitted to Columbia’s graduate program in public affairs (Schl. of Int’l & Public Affairs) in the early 1990s, but was only offered a miserly 5,000 dollars per year in work-study aid, even though I was from a working-class background. The lack of sufficient financial assistance prevented me from enrolling. The notion that Columbia “has very comprehensive financial programs” did not apply to its professional graduate programs at that time, even though students opting for a career in public service could only expect to earn starting salaries in the mid-30,000 dollar per year range. Perhaps the situation has improved since then, but I am skeptical . . .
— Posted by praxis132

33. December 19th,20079:01 pm
#16 - You speak without knowing any facts:
According to Marilyn Taylor, a representative of Columbia’s design team:
“The plan, she said, is to preserve signature buildings and businesses currently in the area, including La Floridita restaurant, Dinosaur Barbecue and a recently opened tapas bar.”
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/09/columbia-defends-its-proposed-harlem-expansion/
— Posted by Richard

34. December 19th,20079:10 pm
Firstly, the bust depot will be placed underground, under the northern part of campus, in a new facility for CNG and hybrid-electric busses. Same with the ConEd substation. Secondly, all the service businesses that are there now can relocate into the new buildings’ lower floors, as per the design. Thirdly there are only a handful of “arts” facilities, and I’m sure the School of the Arts will be able to fill some of the void. Don’t forget the high school, the brain research center, the park, and all the buildings that will be built so that Columbia won’t have to expand as much in the future. Finally, the kind of lab space Columbia needs - to compete with state schools as well as elite institutions - is very technically complicated and specific, and needs the buildings built as designed. Jane Jacob’s quote about “New ideas need old spaces” really does not apply here.

It’s hilarious that rich UWS transplants complain about how columbia is packed with rich kids, when it has quite a large number of hardworking middle class kids, poor grad students, and has attempted to place local businesses in buildings it owns. I have only ever seen neighborhood residents attack each other and Columbia like harpies, demanding something and claiming to be part of some community that never manifests itself. But they never give back themselves, and spend their time meddling in other people’s business. I really wonder what people in neighborhoods without institutions do with their free time…

And comparisons to the 1960s Kirk administration and the gym are totally unwarranted. He was unequivocally a racist, and wanted to purge the neighborhood of bad elements, especially if that meant kicking out immigrants. But now, if Columbia doesn’t take this land, Vornado or Sprayregan will.
— Posted by Neil

35. December 19th,20079:15 pm
As a downtowner, NYU Alum, we always suffered from “Heights envy.” Lucky you all are that this great university, Columbia is even in your midst. Do you not enjoy walking across College Walk, attending many free concerts, talks, the grass and trees, and the sheet “open spaces” afforded by the beautiful campus?

By contrast, think of poor but of course “rick” NYU bordered by immovable neighborhoods, forced to eke out their well-deserved lofty stature among “The Ivies” from inside turn of the 19th century former Triangle Shirtwaist Factory industrial buildings — the same antiquated structures we clambered to when I was a student in the ’60s!

Any university provides multiples of “value added” to its neighbors. Let’s face it, without Columbia University, you would have nothing but sterile office buildings, another “upper east side” or worse, a festering slum. Then who would you complain about, and to?

Don’t worry - Be happy — You who own property will reap higher real estate values as the upscale workers of the university move in, buy your wares, rent your buildings. You who may be displaced renters, CU guarantees your relocation. Apply now, get a CU student financial aid package, get a higher degree!
If you can’t Beat’ em — Join ‘em!
— Posted by Go Violet!

36. December 19th,20079:23 pm
As someone who has shopped at fairway for over a decade, and is an undergraduate alumnus of Columbia, I am surprised at the backlash over the general concept of Columbia developing the area in question into a new campus. Although I agree I wish they had not resorted to the whole imminent domain tactic, the fundamental question of whether the area would benefit and whether Columbia needs the space are really quite obvious. In terms of ‘historic sites’ the buildings sited are Prentiss Hall (which lies outside the area to be developed), the Studebaker building which Columbia is currently using all but one floor of for administrative offices and plans to keep, a bus terminal which could easily be moved underground as part of the project, and some train tracks which most people are unaware of. The number of residences is minuscule, and Columbia has offered to pay to relocate all of the tenants. In exchange, the area will get tons of new buildings and jobs, and a currently largely empty and barren area will become a bustling collegiate neighborhood. How is this a bad thing for anyone?
— Posted by Ben

37. December 19th,20079:26 pm
To Writer Number 14 -
yes - i am the one responsible for those signs. to the extent that you have some issues with them I suggest you take a quick look at the United States Constitution. As I remember, something about freedom of speech…
— Posted by nick sprayregen

38. December 19th,20079:32 pm
once again, i feel the need to chime in…i for one, and, i must say, most in the West Harlem community, have never been against the expansion per se. This is an Ivy League institution that states it needs more space. I respect that. There will be benefits for all by way of the expansion. However, the use of eminent domain is not acceptable, appropriate or ethical in this case.
— Posted by nick sprayregen

39. December 19th,20079:38 pm
The irony of Mr. Sprayregen referencing the Constitution regarding freedom of speech but choosing to ignore what it also says about eminent domain is simply genius.
— Posted by Tim

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/city-council-approves-columbia-expansion-plan/

RANGEL LEGISLATION PROVIDES RELIEF TO CO-OPS

2007-12-19T21:22:00.000-05:00

From: Garcia, Elbert
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 5:05 PM
To: 'rangelmedia@yahoo.com'
Subject: RANGEL LEGISLATION PROVIDES RELIEF TO CO-OPS

PRESS RELEASE
CONGRESSMAN CHARLES RANGEL

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 19, 2007

Contact: Emile Milne 202-225-4365
Elbert Garcia 212-663-3900

RANGEL LEGISLATION PROVIDES RELIEF TO CO-OPS

Provision would allow housing cooperatives to determine commercial rents without sacrificing tax benefits to shareholders

WASHINGTON - Thanks to the efforts of Congressman Charles B. Rangel, hundreds of housing cooperatives boards in New York City will now have greater flexibility in the rent they charge commercial tenants.

Included in a recently passed Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 (HR 3648) is a measure that allows co-ops to determine commercial rents without the fear that the additional income would disqualify owners from deducting their proportionate share of the building's mortgage interest and taxes. Under current law, co-ops are limited to charging commercial tenants rents that do not total more than 20 percent of the building's total income from rents and cooperator maintenance payments.

Rangel was happy to see that Congress could come together to resolve such a longstanding issue.

"I am extremely pleased that the tax code will treat people who live in co-operative housing the same way as homeowners and condo owners are treated when it comes to their renting out part of their property," said Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. "I hope that this will provide relief from for some from the high housing costs in New York."

Co-ops would be allowed to pass through applicable tax benefits if they meet one of three requirements:

1) If 80 percent or more of the co-op's gross income is from the tenant stockholders

2) If 80 percent of the total square footage of the building is used or for residential purposes.

3) If 90% of the costs of operating the building are for the benefit of the tenant stockholders.

Rangel thanked a number of groups, including the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums, for their support and assistance in helping to tackle this issue.

"By working with advocates and industry groups, we were able to craft legislation that made sense to both sides of the political aisle," said Rangel. "Thanks to the hard work of many, the federal government will be able to provide some relief to families as they struggle with the rising living costs."

The co-op provision included in HR 3648 is part of a larger piece of legislation that was crafted as part of a response to the current subprime mortgage crisis. The legislation would provide relief by permanently excluding debt forgiven under these circumstances from tax liability. It would also help would-be homeowners secure their investments through an extension of the tax deduction for private mortgage insurance, and would ease restrictions for qualifying as housing cooperative corporations.

Amended by the Senate last week, The Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 is expected to be signed by President Bush later this week.

NB - It will be effective for years ended after enactment, which means for 2007 if signed by the president by 12/31/07. - JRM

City Council approves Columbia expansion

2007-12-19T21:15:00.000-05:00

crain's new york business.com

City Council approves Columbia expansion
The council squeezed approval into the final week before the Christmas holiday, in an effort to dampen a bitter community battle from stretching into 2008.
December 19. 2007 3:28PMBy: Anne Michaud

The City Council on Wednesday approved Columbia University's controversial plan to rezone 17 acres in West Harlem for an arts, business and science campus, over increasing protest.

The council squeezed approval into the final week before the Christmas holiday, in an effort to dampen a bitter battle in a community of color stretching out into the New Year, as Crain’s reported in a Nov. 25 story.

“After working with Columbia University, Community Board 9, community advocates and local elected officials, we’ve come up with a plan that will both preserve and improve areas of West Harlem,” Council Speaker Christine Quinn said in a statement.

Two more members of the West Harlem Local Development Corp. – a board chosen to represent the community in talks with Columbia – quit Wednesday in protest over the rushed process. The LDC has been negotiating a package of housing, jobs and education benefits to compensate the Manhattanville neighborhood for the loss of residences and businesses, including a tentative $150 million benefits agreement. Details of the agreement were not finalized before the Council’s vote on Wednesday.

Three LDC board members resigned last month in order to criticize the secret negotiations, which they say were designed to buy the community’s acquiescence. People who remain on the board have promised to keep the negotiations confidential.

Columbia’s plan marks the culmination of more than four years of work by the university, which has been buying up land and properties in the neighborhood of the campus-to-be and now owns more than 70% of the area. The university wants to spend $7 billion to build as many as 18 towers with classrooms, offices, student housing and laboratory space, which will give it the facilities to compete with other world-class institutions.

Despite community opposition, the university has completed the land-use approval process with most of its plan intact, making only a few concessions. At the request of Borough President Scott Stringer, Columbia agreed to endow a $20 million Manhattanville Neighborhood Preservation Fund, which, together with other measures, would preserve or create 1,139 housing units. The school will also provide $4 million to fund an anti-harassment legal assistance program to address indirect residential displacement.

Next, the university must submit a general project plan to the Empire State Development Corp., which has the final say over whether properties can be taken by eminent domain, against an owner's will. However, that may not be necessary. The three business owners who were refusing to sell to Columbia resumed talks with the university last Friday.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/FREE/121035688/1058/newsletter01

City Council Approves Columbia's M'Ville Rezoning

2007-12-19T19:16:00.000-05:00

City Council Approves Columbia's M'Ville Rezoning
By Daniel Amzallag
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 19, 2007

The New York City Council voted in favor of Columbia’s proposed 197-c rezoning plan and Community Board 9’s 197-a plan in a stated meeting Wednesday afternoon.

The Council vote—on modifications of both plans done by the City Planning Commission—is the penultimate step in the rezoning process which Columbia must undergo before beginning construction in Manhattanville. If the Council approves the proposal, Mayor Michael Bloomberg will have a chance to veto it, though he has expressed support for the expansion.

Council Speaker Christine Quinn expressed support for the Columbia plan, which was approved by a vote of 35-5-6. “It’s a rezoning that in addition to solidifying New York as one of the higher educational capitals of the world, it is also a rezoning that will facilitate the creation of 6,000 additional and permanent jobs in our city,” she said.

During much of the Council meeting, members of the Coalition to Preserve Community, a local anti-expansion group, waved images of money in the air from the balconies in protest. After the vote had been announced, the balcony was cleared due to shouts and disruptions, such as, "You're clearing us out but you're clearing out West Harlem!" and "You will never represent this city!"

At meetings earlier in the day, three Council committees approved the plans before approval by the entire Council. Members of the Zoning & Franchises, Land Use, and Planning, Dispositions, & Concessions Committees raised concerns of eminent domain, the vote’s timing, and the transparency of the process. There had been confusion among anti-expansion activists as well as some Council members as to whether the vote would take place today, as many expected it to take place in mid-January, closer to the legal deadline for the Council vote.

“Nobody’s private property in this city is safe,” Councilman Tony Avella, D-Queens, said, receiving applause. “Anytime a developer or a private institution with political influence comes along, nobody is safe.” Avella, who is chair of the Zoning & Franchises Committee, voted against Columbia’s proposed rezoning.

“I think they’re rushing through the vote so they can give Columbia a Christmas present,” said Councilman Charles Barron, D-Brooklyn, who also voted against the 197-c plan.

Barron made a motion, which was ultimately was not approved, for the vote to be delayed until the Jan. 15 deadline in order to “have more time for the community to engage in the process,” he said. Councilman Robert Jackson, D-Manhattanville, spoke out against Barron's motion, citing last week’s public hearing as evidence of the community’s participation in the process.
But Jackson and Councilwoman Inez Dickens, D-Morningside Heights, pointed to years of consultations with local community boards to refute charges that the process has been rushed.

“Whether we agree or disagree with whatever came out of those presentations, it can never be said that the process was unfair and did not allow for the public to have a say so,” Dickens said.
The hearing was delayed almost three hours, which Cynthia Doty, a member of the CPC, attributed to the ongoing negotiations of a community benefits agreement. A tentative CBA valued at $150 million was announced last night.

As the committee hearing began, the CPC held a brief rally outside City Hall. “What we’re seeing is the worst kind of undemocratic unparticipatory process that you can imagine,” Tom DeMott, CC '80 and leader of the CPC, said.

“This vote today is one of political expediency for the purpose of her mayoral bid,” Nellie Bailey, president of the Harlem Tenants Council, said of Quinn.

Quinn addressed accusations of scheduling the vote for political gains in a press conference following the committee vote, calling them “absurd statement[s],” and stating that it is the Land Use Committee’s duty to vote in favor of the interests of the neighborhoods at hand.

Please continue to check www.columbiaspectator.com for news updates during the winter break.

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28612

noLandGrab: PRESS RELEASE: ANOTHER WEST HARLEM LDC MEMBER RESIGNS

2007-12-19T18:08:00.000-05:00

noLandGrab

No Land Grab
« B65 new temporary bus stop Main The Jane Jacobs exhibit: a worthy reaffirmation but just the start of a longer discussion »
December 19, 2007

RELEASE: ANOTHER WEST HARLEM LDC MEMBER RESIGNS

Rev. Earl Kooperkamp Refuses to Vote for a CBA Which Does Not Address the Impact of the Columbia Expansion on the Community

COALITION TO PRESERVE COMMUNITY PRESS CONFERENCE AND RALLY ON CITY HALL STEPS - WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 19, 1:00 P.M.

The Coalition to Preserve Community (CPC) will hold a rally and press conference on the steps of City Hall at 1:00PM today, Wednesday, Dec. 19, to protest the vote in favor of the Columbia expansion plan in West Harlem. Speaker Quinn and Mayor Bloomberg have been pushing this plan hard behind the scenes with committee meetings left unannounced until the last minute in a disgraceful display of power playing which prevents citiizens from civic particpation in the most fundamental ways. They have ignored conmunity concerns expressed for years by the community and articulated recently in the Community Board 9’s (CB9) 32 to 2 vote against the Columbia plan and its ten point resolution. For years, members of the CPC have objected to eminent domain, displacement, the plan to place biolevel lab #3’s in a residential community, and the construction of a bathtub design foundation for 17 acre carve out in a flood plain area. Neither CB 9, nor the CPC, have been supported from elected officials in City Hall.
[continued after the jump]

Uptown, the elected officials have been equally unresponsive. They have taken control of the West Harlem Local Development Corporation (LDC), a not-for-profit entity specifically created to negotiate a community benefits agreement with Columbia in connection with its proposed expansion. They have adopted a compromising stance. Last month, three LDC directors resigned, and tomorrow, Rev. Earl Kooperkamp will announce his resignation. This is a rigged process and the LDC has refused to be a true advocate for the 197 A plan. It has apparently given the green light to eminent domain for the property owners, and avoided the fact that Columbia’s all or nothing declaration means that longtime residents in the expansion area will be pushed out - whether the process is called eminent domain or not. The LDC met last night with Councilman Jackson negotiating with Columbia officials and apparently this politician-dominated board will also accept biolevel #3 labs and a gutting of demands on environmental issues.

CB 9 Chair Jordi Reyes-Montblanc recently stated on a PBS show that he expected the CBA to have a value of $700 to $800 million, similar to the percentage provided in the Staples agreement in California. But, as the CPC predicted, the crumbs that Scott Stringer initiated when he sold out the community and voted for Columbia, have underminined negotiations. Community outrage is at an all time high and Columbia’s terrible community relations have reached a crisis. The vote today may well be the end of the ULURP process, but it is just the beginning of an on the ground campaign to stop the Columbia expansion and all zoning plans in Harlem meant to remove longtime residents.

— END —

Posted by lumi at December 19, 2007 5:17 AM

http://www.nolandgrab.org/archives/2007/12/press_release_a_2.html

LET COLUMBIA GROW

2007-12-19T15:28:00.000-05:00

LET COLUMBIA GROW

December 19, 2007 -- After years of wrangling, the City Council appears set to approve - possibly as early as today - Columbia University's bold plan to expand its campus in the Manhattanville section of Harlem.

Though we've had some reservations with the proposal, the way it's been sold to the public and, in particular, Columbia itself, the council nonetheless should bestow its blessings on the expansion - and hasten the day when shovels start digging.

Ultimately, the expansion will be a big plus for the area, the university, the local economy - and the city at large.

It will create, for example, more than 6.8 million square feet of space for research labs and other academic facilities.

The new campus will provide added recreational and commercial space - as well as improved access to the Hudson River waterfront park.

And it promises 6,000 new jobs, once all's said and done - and billions in new economic activity at local shops and restaurants, as well as from new vendors at university-owned buildings.

The Coalition to Preserve Community, an anti-expansion outfit, worries these gains aren't worth it if the neighborhood becomes "homogenized and gentrified."
That's just silly.

The plan aims to take a stagnant, depressing swath of land and make it attractive - and economically productive.

What's wrong with that?

It's a shame that Columbia botched its marketing of the plan so badly. And that it has had to battle its reputation as a poor neighbor in its community.

Since presenting the expansion, school officials have tried, literally, to buy off community members.

They've conducted back-room dealings with political leaders.

And the school's hired guns - bygone-era black leaders like Bill Lynch, David Dinkins and Hazel Dukes - have insulted the community's intelligence by playing the race card, as was the practice back in the bad old days, to win support for the plan. At one point, as Tom Elliott noted in these pages, the school apparently paid outsiders to pose as supporters.

It's also disappointing that the school has continued to use the threat of the state's powers of eminent domain to make the deal work. What that means, in plain English, is forcing property owners to give up their land - at a price they may not agree is worth it.

(Nor have other Columbia infamies - such as allowing an anti-illegal-immigrant speaker to be physically run off stage and inviting Iran's heinous President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak - helped win it much sympathy.)

But again, at the end of the day, the expansion will spawn huge benefits.

The council can seal a bottom-line good deal today by giving Columbia's expansion a green light.
document.write('');

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12192007/postopinion/editorials/let_columbia_grow_26570.htm

Council Signs Off on Manhattanville Expansion

2007-12-19T15:23:00.000-05:00

Council Signs Off on Manhattanville Expansion
By Daniel Amzallag and Betsy Morais
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 19, 2007

The New York City Council paved the way for Columbia's Manhattanville expansion Wednesday by approving a combination of rezoning plans melding elements of proposals from the University and Community Board 9.

The approval of the rezoning plans, known as 197-c and 197-a, followed a $150 million community benefits agreement and is the penultimate step in the rezoning process which Columbia must undergo before beginning construction in Manhattanville. Mayor Michael Bloomberg will now have five days in which to veto the vote, although his past support for the Columbia expansion suggests that he will approve the Council’s decision.

“It’s a rezoning that in addition to solidifying New York as one of the higher educational capitals of the world, it is also a rezoning that will facilitate the creation of 6,000 additional and permanent jobs in our city,” Council Speaker Christine Quinn said.

Columbia’s 197-c was approved with 35 votes in favor, 5 against, and 6 abstentions. Many who favored the plan explained that, while they are concerned about the University’s possible use of eminent domain to acquire the three unattained commercial properties in the expansion footprint, they supported Columbia’s vision based on their confidence in the local council members—Robert Jackson, D-Manhattanville and Washington Heights, and Inez Dickens, D-Morningside Heights and Central Harlem.

City Councilman Tony Avella, D-Queens, raised concerns that the Council’s approval of the expansion plan would set a precedent for the use of eminent domain in situations not essential to public good. “Nobody’s private property in this city is safe,” Avella, who voted against Columbia’s plan, said. “Anytime a developer or a private institution with political influence comes along, nobody is safe.”

“This is not just about Columbia University,” Councilman Vincent Ignizio, R-Staten Island, said. “This is about a powerful entity which seeks to take land from honest landowners who are paying their taxes.”

During the general Council meeting, members of the Coalition to Preserve Community, a local anti-expansion group, waved “Bollinger Bucks” in the air in protest. When the final vote was officially announced, activists were cleared from the chamber amidst shouts of “Harlem not for sale!” and “You’re clearing us out but you’re clearing out West Harlem!” Outside, Columbia officials exchanged celebratory hugs.

The full vote came after three committees convened to discuss and ultimately approve both plans to pass on to the rest of City Council. Members of the Land Use committee and the Zoning & Franchises and Planning, Dispositions, & Concessions subcommittees raised concerns about eminent domain, the transparency of the process, and vote’s timing.

There had been confusion among activists, as well as some Council members, as to whether the vote would take in fact place Wednesday, as many expected it to occur in mid-January, closer to the legal deadline for the Council vote.

“I think they’re rushing through the vote so they can give Columbia a Christmas present,” said Council member Charles Barron, D-Brooklyn, who voted against the University’s 197-c plan.

Barron made a motion, which was later denied, at the committee hearing for the vote to be delayed until the January 15 deadline in order to “have more time for the community to engage in the process.” Council member Jackson spoke out against Barron's motion, citing last week’s public hearing—in which over 90 speakers gave testimony—as evidence of the community’s participation in the process.

Jackson and Dickens pointed to years of consultation with local community boards to refute charges that the process has been rushed. “Whether we agree or disagree with whatever came out of those presentations, it can never be said that the process was unfair and did not allow for the public to have a say so,” Dickens said, receiving boos and coughs from audience members.
Prior to the Land Use committee meeting, the Coalition to Preserve Community held a rally on the City Hall steps.

“What we’re seeing is the worst kind of undemocratic, unparticipatory process that you can imagine,” Tom DeMott, CC ’80 and leader of the CPC, said.

“This vote today is one of political expediency for the purpose of her mayoral bid,” Nellie Bailey, president of the Harlem Tenants Council, said of Quinn.

Quinn addressed accusations of scheduling the vote for political gains in a press conference following the joint committee hearing, calling them “absurd statement[s],” and stating that it is the Land Use committee’s duty to vote in favor of the interests of the neighborhoods at hand.

Also outside, student activists voiced frustration with City Council members who had seemed visibly confused by some of the details of the plans during the committee hearings.

“One Council member [Gale Brewer, D-Upper West Side] asked, ‘did the Community Board even vote on this?’” Samantha Barron, BC ’09, said. Brewer also asked about what the next step of the process would be for the two Manhattanville rezoning plans, to which Land Use committee chair Melinda Katz, D-Queens, replied would be a vote by the Empire State Development Corporation.

But City Council’s vote Wednesday evening was final, and needs only to be signed by Mayor Bloomberg. The ESDC will not vote on the plans, but rather is responsible for determining whether Manhattanville is a “blighted” area, and therefore whether it is eligible for potential evocation of eminent domain.

University President Lee Bollinger released a statement expressing gratitude and optimism for the Council's approval Wednesday evening. “As a result, not only will our universities continue to attract creative minds with the determination to advance knowledge in service of humankind; they will remain a vibrant source of good, middle-income jobs for a diversity of people seeking to improve their lives here,” he said.

Sara Vogel contributed to this article.
Article Tools:

View Comments ( 9)Post a Comment

What about the people? Specifically, what about them. There is all this talk about ruining a community and its people. Tell us, what about them?
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 9:36am
reply

If you don't know - I mean REALLY don't know, then you, too, brother, are a victim of the Core Curriculum.
Too much fantasy and mythology.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 10:27am
reply

It's becoming more and more clear why these people oppose the core curriculum:
They don't want people to develop critical thinking skills.
People like the above commenter rely entirely on emotional appeal and doublespeak to promote their goals. They have no rational arguments; their only tools are labels like "Racist!" and "Oppressor!".
If people learn to think, there's the risk that they will begin analyzing how these terms are being employed - and that would of course blow the cover on the entire operation.
So kids: Don't learn the core. Turn in self-righteous essays about post-colonialist thinkers writing in jargon that no one can understand, explaining that writing an essay about Rousseau would conflict with the convictions you began holding deeply six months ago when you first came to campus.
Posted by: anonymous238 December 20th, 2007 @ 2:22pm
reply

Indeed. Civil rights are fantasies. Let's build it now before any deluded kids start to believe Locke or Fanon
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 11:48am
reply

Well, there goes a neighborhood. Fascination with wealth, power and success have overcome all sense of community.
In my opinion, Columbia is a dehumanizing force with magical powers - money!
In this place, that is a win 100% of the time.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 7:18am
reply

Yes, those wonderful auto repair shops, gas stations and storage facilities really do define "community"
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 7:43am
reply

You forgot the people. You are another victim of the Core Curriculum. Fantasy above reality, as usual.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 8:56am
reply

i figured it out - spot on - studying some of the greatest minds in history makes me blind to reality, deludes me, renders me incapable of criticism and such ... but what do I do, it's lured me in, and now it's a dangerous and slippery spiral all the way down to becoming ...educated (the horror). poor me, too much fantasy, too much fantasy; perhaps it's time to shut out these fantasies, and accept the reality that columbia is a vicious manipulative mega-corp, sadistically targetting cheaper areas, senseless and heartless.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 9:27am
reply

Yes! You finally have it!
It took me a while to get it, too.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 20th, 2007 @ 9:43am
reply

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28614

14-year-old stabbed on Manhattan subway platform

2007-12-18T14:22:00.000-05:00

14-year-old stabbed on Manhattan subway platform
By JONATHAN LEMIRE DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Tuesday, December 18th 2007, 1:58 PM

A 14-year-old boy was stabbed in the chest during a fight on an upper Manhattan subway platform this morning, police said.

The victim was arguing with a man on the downtown platform of the A and C lines at the 145th St. station in Hamilton Heights, police said.

The boy staggered to a police booth within the station before collapsing, leaving a pool of blood on the ground just after 8 a.m.

He was taken to Harlem Hospital where he was listed in stable condition, officials said. His injuries were not considered life-threatening. His name was not released by police.

After the stabbing, the suspect ran off and remains at large. It was not immediately clear what sparked the attack.

To post comments, REGISTER or LOG IN

ThatGuy Dec 18, 2007 7:40:56 PM Report Offensive Post THEY SHOULD SHOOT HIM ON SITE WHEN THEY FIND HIM.

Calico Dec 18, 2007 9:05:05 PM Report Offensive Post A long time ago, kids were taught to respect elders; today, kids can't wipe their rear-end but demand that adults respect THEM; meanwhile, they aren't even old enough to legally consent to sexual activity with an adult, buy alcoholic breverages or cigarettes, or serve in the military or pay taxes & they want to be cuddled by mommy & daddy. Did it occur to anyone to hear or know what really happened? 4 kids taller than me jumped me, stabbed me in my hip; I defended myself & hospitalized 3 (& the cops HIT ME) & they TRY to press charges on me! Good thing there were witnesses or I would've been labeled a child abuser when those thugs tried to mug me in the subway on my way home from college! Find out some facts before you put your foot & leg in your mouth!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/18/2007-12-18_14yearold_stabbed_on_manhattan_subway_pl.html

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

14-year-old stabbed in subway attack
By TANANGACHI MFUNI and JONATHAN LEMIREDAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Wednesday, December 19th 2007, 4:00 AM

A 14-year-old boy was stabbed three times during a fight on an upper Manhattan subway platform during Tuesday's morning rush, police said.

The boy was arguing with another teen on the downtown platform of the A and C lines at the 145th St. station in Hamilton Heights about 8 a.m., police said. The suspect then stabbed the victim in the torso, chest and right arm, police said.

The 14-year-old staggered to a transit police booth in the station before he collapsed. His attacker, whom he identified as a 16-year-old boy who went to a nearby high school, is believed to have escaped on a departing train.

The victim was taken to Harlem Hospital, where he was listed in stable condition. He told investigators he knew his attacker.

The victim's name was not released because he is a juvenile, police said.

To post comments, REGISTER or LOG IN
babydoll32720 Dec 19, 2007 7:50:07 AM Report Offensive Post Robert Morgenthau is braggging about stats!!!!!--and we have a stabbing on a train, a double homicide in the bronx and I have yet to finish reading the paper---This poor child whatever the problem was the answer to the problem is not stabbing--why do the youth feel that they have to solve their problems with violence--life is not valuable at all---if people would just think

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/19/2007-12-19_14yearold_stabbed_in_subway_attack.html

2007-12-18T12:04:00.000-05:00

Activists, Officials Confused About Manhattanville Vote Timeline
By Daniel Amzallag
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 18, 2007

Local activists, elected officials, and Columbia officers reacted with confusion Tuesday as rumors spread that the City Council could vote on Manhattanville expansion as early as Wednesday.

The Council vote is the final step of the rezoning process which Columbia must go through before construction begins at Manhattanville. City law allows the Council 50 days after a proposal is referred from the Planning Commission—in this case until January 15—before voting on the rezoning proposal. Expansion opponents had not widely expected a vote to take place until next month.

But Monday night, the Coalition to Preserve Community, a local group opposed to Columbia’s expansion, circulated a statement announcing that the vote would take place Wednesday and calling a protest and press conference at City Hall.

As of 6 p.m. Tuesday, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s office would not confirm that the vote would take place Wednesday, saying only that there is “a tentative meeting for tomorrow.”
“Land use meetings are often subject to change, often moved around. It’s difficult to say,” an official in the speaker’s press office said.

Tom DeMott, CC ’80 and the leader of the CPC, learned of the vote through a chain of communications including local landowner Nick Sprayregen, his attorney Norman Siegel, and Tony Avella, D-Queens and chair of the Council’s Zoning & Franchises Committee. Siegel said that he had previously been working under the premise that the vote would be taking place in January.

Avella said that a Monday morning meeting of the committee was recessed until Wednesday morning at the request of Quinn. “Why would they do that if they weren’t setting the ULURP [rezoning] vote for Wednesday?” he said.

“I think there’s a strong possibility that the vote is going to happen Wednesday,” Avella added, although he said he could neither confirm nor deny the possibility.

But at least one local resident said that the vote had been publicly scheduled for Wednesday long before Monday’s rumors. “We’ve always heard that it would be tomorrow [Wednesday]. It was always a possibility that it would go to January, but according to the calendar, it would be tomorrow,” Maritta Dunn said. “I only heard that there was a possibility that it might be taken to January a day or so ago.”

As of Tuesday evening, the City Council’s Web site did not include Manhattanville on Wednesday’s agenda. According to the site, the last full Council meeting of the year is scheduled to take place Wednesday at 1:30 p.m., with a joint meeting of the Zoning & Franchises and Planning, Dispositions & Concessions committees at 9:30 a.m., and a Land Use committee meeting at 10 a.m.

Columbia was always aware that a vote on the rezoning could come at any time following a public hearing that took place last Thursday, but was not aware of specific plans, University spokesperson LaVerna Fountain said. “We’re always prepared no matter what. It’s always been a matter that they can call us at anytime, and we have to be ready to go,” she said.

The new timeframe is an attempt to hasten the approval of Columbia’s plan, Sprayregen and DeMott said. “Time is on our side, not theirs. The more time we have to organize people to raise issues the more opportunity we have to make arguments which might make the City Council people reluctant to support the plan,” DeMott said.

Sprayregen accused Columbia of influencing the Council’s elected officials toward rushing to a vote, allegations which Fountain denied.

The Wednesday vote raises concerns about whether the University will be able to negotiate a community benefits agreement before the Council vote. The West Harlem Local Development Corporation, the group empowered to negotiate a community benefits agreement with Columbia, will meet with University officials Tuesday night, said Dunn, who is an officer of the WHLDC. While it is not legally necessary to finalize a community benefits agreement before the vote, Dunn said, “I think everybody would like that, whether or not that’s possible I don’t know.”

Richard Lipsky, a lobbyist for Sprayregen—who resigned from the LDC in protest three weeks ago—attributed the ambiguity regarding the vote’s scheduling to the lack of a finalized community benefits agreement. “If they don’t have a deal and they can’t announce an agreement and trumpet all these benefits, then they won’t do it [vote on the rezoning],” he said.

Sprayregen is currently negotiating the possibility of a land swap of his properties for properties owned by the University that are not in the expansion zone. The City Council vote, or lack thereof, will not impact the land swap negotiations between Sprayregen and Columbia, Lipsky said.

Betsy Morais contributed to this article.

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28606

Anti-Expansion Group Says Council Vote on M'ville Rezoning Will Occur on Wednesday

2007-12-18T08:50:00.000-05:00

Anti-Expansion Group Says Council Vote on M'ville Rezoning Will Occur on Wednesday
By Betsy Morais
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 18, 2007

An anti-expansion activist group released a statement on Monday saying that the City Council vote on the Columbia’s rezoning plan for Manhattanville has been scheduled for Wednesday.

The Coalition to Preserve Community sent out the statement in an e-mail on Monday saying that the vote has been set and urging people to attend a protest beforehand. The Council vote, which will be the final step of the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, was expected to take place in mid-January. It will determine whether or not the University can move forward with its plans to build a campus in Manhattanville.

According to CPC leader and longtime neighborhood activist Tom DeMott, CC ’80, the three City Council subcommittees—Zoning & Franchises, Planning, Dispositions, & Concessions, and Land Use—will vote on Columbia’s 197-c expansion plan in their meetings Wednesday morning, followed by a full Council vote at 1:30 pm.

The City Council website had not posted any information about the vote and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan) could not be reached for comment late Monday night.

Assistant Vice President for Public Affairs LaVerna Fountain said she had heard a similar rumor on Monday afternoon, but could not confirm or deny the alleged vote date. Despite what would be a surprisingly early vote by City Council, Fountain said, “We’ll be ready to do whatever is asked of us.”

According to DeMott, Zoning & Franchises subcommittee chair Tony Avella, D-Queens, had a meeting scheduled for Monday morning that Quinn postponed until Wednesday. Avella then indicated that the Council would hold its ULURP vote that afternoon, DeMott said.

Avella has expressed support for the Coalition to Preserve Community at numerous rallies and has spoken out against development saying, “We need a city that protects its citizens and doesn’t cave into developers." Avella could not be reached for comment late Monday night.

Many experts, including Manhattan Institute’s Center for Rethinking Development Deputy Director Hope Cohen, have predicted that the Council will vote strongly in favor of Columbia’s plan.

The CPC e-mail did not say whether there will be a Council vote on Community Board 9’s 197-a plan, a framework for future growth in the area that has concurrently been going through ULURP and conflicts with the 197-c on many accounts regarding affordable housing, building heights, and methods of expansion.

Last month, the City Planning Commission voted in favor of the University’s 197-c as well as CB9’s 197-a, though both approved versions were modified. CB9 chair Jordi Reyes-Montblanc and other local activists criticized the changes as favoring the 197-c and insufficiently reconciling discrepancies between the two plans.

View Comments ( 4)Post a Comment

Glad to see Columbia-paid Bill Lynch and Associates are earning their wages trashing community members.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 18th, 2007 @ 10:34am
reply

And I'm glad to see that you are blindly jumping to conclusions about who is posting the comments. I am a "community member" who lives in the West 130s, does not earn a penny from anyone related to this project, and still think Tom DeMott needs to get a life. Stop trying to make it seem that anyone who thinks the expansion is a good idea is somehow related to a consulting firm. There are plenty of people in the community who think the expansion is a great thing for the area.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 18th, 2007 @ 11:03am
reply

Tom DeMott is the one that really needs to get a life. He seems to spend every waking moment fighting everything that Columbia does.
Posted by: anonymous (not verified) December 18th, 2007 @ 9:57am
reply

If only these "anti-expansion activist[s]" had jobs. Then not only would they have no time to protest, but they might just have nothing to protest about.

Posted by: anonymous238 December 18th, 2007 @ 9:36am

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28603

Columbia Enters Talks with Manhattanville Land Owner

2007-12-17T14:15:00.000-05:00

Columbia Enters Talks with Manhattanville Land Owner
By Betsy Morais
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 17, 2007

Columbia began introductory negotiations Thursday for a land swap with Nick Sprayregen, the largest property owner in the footprint of the university’s Manhattanville expansion plan.

Tuck-It-Away Associates President Sprayregen has introduced his proposal for a land swap with Columbia on numerous occasions—in the press, in a letter to the Empire State Development Corporation, and at a City Council hearing Wednesday—but this was the first direct contact he or his lawyer, Norman Siegel, have had with the university in three years.

Sprayregen offered to trade three of his properties on the west side of Broadway, where Columbia seeks to build its Manhattanville campus, for university-owned buildings on the east side. Although said Sprayregen would prefer to maintain ownership of 3261 Broadway, 614 W. 131st St., and 655 W. 125th St., he believes his compromise is a more desirable alternative than potential eviction by eminent domain.

According to Siegel, he and Sprayregen met for about 50 minutes with Senior Executive Vice President Robert Kasdin, Columbia lobbyist Bill Lynch—creator of the Coalition for the Future of Manhattanville, and a lawyer for the university. They discussed the land swap in “general terms,” Siegel explained, who described the meeting as “pleasant.”

“I’m sure we’ll talk in the near future,” Siegel said, at which point Sprayregen will outline his property trade proposal in further detail.

Columbia spokesperson LaVerna Fountain declined to discuss the status of the University’s negotiations with Sprayregen and Siegel, but said in a statement, “Our goal has always been to reach successful agreements with all property owners within the 17 acres of the proposed expansion zone.”

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28602

Columbia expansion opposed in heated hearing

2007-12-13T19:01:00.000-05:00

Columbia expansion opposed in heated hearing
By David Freedlander,

amNewYork Staff Writer

More stories dfreedlander@am-ny.com
December 13, 2007

Opponents and backers of Columbia's planned expansion into Manhattanville took their fight to City Hall Wednesday in a packed and tense public hearing. "We will be here for as long as it takes," said Tony Avella, chair of the City Council's Zoning Committee, told the hundreds of people who filled the gallery for the mid-day session that stretched on for more than six hours of testimony from both sides of the battles.

"This is the people's house. We will make sure everybody has a right to be heard," Avella said.

Columbia President Lee Bollinger stressed the central role the university plays in the life of New York City and the nation, stressing that it's vital for the campus to expand into 17-acres of Manhattanville to build research labs and student housing.

"Through the university so much of what we value in American life was derived," he said. "This is an extremely important institution. It's health and future depends on having the space to do the kind of work we have to do."

Community board members and representatives from other area groups said Columbia's expansion would displace longtime residents and destroy the neighborhood's historic character.

"The issue was not whether Columbia should expand but how they should expand," said Patricia Jones, chairwoman of the West Harlem Local Development Corporation.

Although Columbia's plan has already passed the City Planning Commission and is widely expected to pass the Council, yesterday's hearing was not without discord.

Although Bollinger testified, Columbia would not use eminent domain against residential properties, Avella said he wanted similar commitments made for commercial properties.

"I stand with you," he told the plan's opponents. "I'm not going to support a form of the Columbia plan with any kind of eminent domain."

Councilman Charles Barron (D-Brooklyn), meanwhile was a little more forthcoming when he interrupted Avella."Be vigilant in this process," Barron said. "Their history has shown that they can not be trusted."

A second public hearing is slated for January.

http://www.amny.com/news/local/am-columbia1213,0,1387728.story

Columbia Says Eminent Domain Would Not Affect Housing

2007-12-13T18:08:00.000-05:00

Columbia Says Eminent Domain Would Not Affect Housing
By BENJAMIN SARLINSpecial to the SunDecember 13, 2007

Seeking to defuse outrage over the threatened use of eminent domain in its planned Harlem expansion, the president of Columbia University, Lee Bollinger, and Vice President Robert Kasdin say they would not use the procedure to acquire residential property.

Local community board residents and members of the City Council, however, are insisting that the option be taken off the table entirely, including its possible use against commercial landowners.

The two sides clashed at a packed hearing in City Hall yesterday, interrupted at times by loud boos and applause, to discuss the planned development. "Under no conditions will Columbia University seek eminent domain with respect to any residential housing," Mr. Kasdin said. "We will not use eviction to further our project."

Council Member Tony Avella, the chairman of the Zoning and Franchises Committee, said he would vote against the Columbia plan unless they "do away with any use of eminent domain."

Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, the chairwoman of Community Board 9, which includes the proposed expansion site, said the university must "cease the threat of eminent domain to intimidate owners into selling."

Mr. Kasdin said he believes negotiations would end standoffs between the university and the remaining landowners, which he said comprises three people controlling 10% of the property that would be developed.

One of the owners, Nick Spreyregen, will begin talks with Columbia today about a possible agreement, but said in a phone interview he is "not going to negotiate while eminent domain is still on the table."

Mr. Bollinger told the council that his and Mr. Kasdin's testimony "add up to a sense that we've established some trust between the college and surrounding neighborhoods," a statement that sparked a round of boos and hisses from audience members. Mr. Avella threatened to halt the hearing unless the crowd restrained themselves.

Mayor Dinkins testified in support of Mr. Bollinger's plan, saying that while Columbia's relationship with Harlem has not always been ideal, the proposed expansion "can and will be a good thing for both the university and its Harlem neighbors." Mr. Dinkins added that the plan would bring thousands of new jobs to the area.

NB - This is no news at all, CU announced their desire not to invoke eminent domain on residential buildings months ago. This reproter more than likely wan't even there for even on my better-looking days I have never been taken for a woman. JRM

Dear J. Reyes-Montblanc,
The comments you submitted at The New York Sun are now online. You can view them at: http://www.nysun.com/comments/51155
Warm regards, The The New York Sun staff

http://www.nysun.com/article/67996

City Council Members Hold Hearing on Manhattanville Rezoning Proposals

2007-12-13T12:51:00.000-05:00

City Council Members Hold Hearing on Manhattanville Rezoning Proposals
By Betsy Morais
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 13

Columbia and Community Board 9 representatives made their cases for alternative Manhattanville zoning proposals before a packed crowd at a City Council hearing Wednesday morning.

Two Council committees, the Zoning & Franchises committee and the Planning, Dispositions & Concessions committee, held the joint hearing in anticipation of next month’s City Council vote on Columbia 197-c and Community Board 9’s 197-a. The vote will be the final step in the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, a mandatory public review process. If the University’s 197-c passes, it will move forward with its project to build a new campus in Manhattanville.

President Lee Bollinger presented Columbia’s 197-c plan, arguing that the proposed expansion will benefit the city.

“Columbia is critical to New York City. …The relationship between creativity, talent, and commitments of great universities to cities is one of the most important elements of the vitality of a city,” Bollinger said in his introduction of the Columbia expansion project to the council.
Maxine Griffith, vice president for government and community affairs, former New York City Mayor David Dinkins, and Senior Executive Vice President Robert Kasdin also represented Columbia.

Outgoing CB9 chair Jordi Reyes-Montblanc spoke in support of the board’s 197-a plan, a framework which aims to protect the community while allowing it to grow. Aspects of the 197-a have been incorporated into the altered version of the 197-c, but modifications of the New York City Planning Commission seem to favor the University plan.

Last month, the City Planning Commission approved both plans—but only approved the 197-a for areas outside of the expansion zone. It eliminated two of the planned academic research buildings along Broadway, reduced permitted building heights, and made requirements for a more open, free-flowing campus landscape. Reyes-Montblanc characterized the modified plans as insufficient in reconciling their differences.

Pat Jones, chair of CB9’s 197-a committee, called for a more comprehensive solution to the affordable housing conflict, higher environmental standards, landmark designations, and a clear statement of opposition to Columbia’s potential use of eminent domain.

City Councilman Robert Jackson, D-Washington Heights, and City Councilwoman Inez Dickens, D-Harlem, raised questions about what Columbia has done to meet the needs of the community, particularly regarding affordable housing.Kasdin explained that the University is committed to providing housing for residents in Manhattanville, especially for those in the CB9 district.

Although City Council’s vote will solely address the rezoning of the area and will not address the potential use of eminent domain, Council members raised the issue repeatedly. “Don’t trust Columbia University. …Their history has shown that they cannot be trusted,” said Councilman Charles Barron, D-Brooklyn, receiving cheers from the packed chamber.

Zoning & Franchises subcommittee Chair Tony Avella, D-Queens, continually had to subdue the crowd. “I remind everybody—no hissing, no booing, no yelling out, no taunts,” he said to the crowd of West Harlem, many of whom held up “Stop Columbia” flyers.

Kasdin expressed confidence in the University’s ability to reach solutions with property owners in the footprint of the plan, since Columbia has already made 37 agreements with local businesses and only three remain.

Over 90 people gave testimony after both sides presented their plans, alternating between speakers for and against Columbia’s plan.

“We do not need a plan that has the destruction of the existing community at its core, that will continue to diminish housing for our people, create fewer jobs for residents than it eliminates, bring us potential environmental hazards, irreversibly alter our diverse socio-economic fabric, and disrespect our historical and architectural integrity,” said longtime community activist and Coalition to Preserve Community member, Tom Kappner.

Others stood up for Columbia’s expansion plan, including members of the Coalition for the Future of Manhattanville. The Coalition was created by Bill Lynch Associates, a lobbyist firm that Columbia hired.

Coalition member Reverend Reginald Williams explained that critics of the University’s plan mischaracterize the true sentiments of the neighborhood. He said he would rather see the University develop Manhattanville than have another developer build a slew of luxury condominiums.

Robbie Cohen, second-year class president of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, submitted a statement of support. “We believe, frankly, that the good that will almost undoubtedly come from this 21st century research campus is essentially limitless in potential. …Sincere concern for the quality of life of their future neighbors has satisfied us that this compromise is one that is principled and necessary,” the statement read.

Echoing concerns raised by council members about eminent domain, Nick Sprayregen—the largest property owner in the footprint of Columbia’s plan—and his lawyer, Norman Siegel entreated the council to take a stance on the issue. Sprayregen has yet to negotiate with Columbia directly, but has come up with a land swap plan that he raised during the hearing. The swap would offer desired buildings to Columbia so the University would not have to use eminent domain to acquire them.

Jackson offered his assistance to Sprayregen and Siegel to promote the idea of a property swap, but criticized them for not bringing the plan to him directly. Siegel defended his strategy in which, until recently, the swap was discussed only in the press.

“You’ve played with Columbia, that’s what you’ve done,” Siegel told Jackson in a heated dialogue, adding, “You’ve made it clear to the community that you don’t stand with us. …We don’t trust Columbia, and at certain points along this process, we don’t trust you.”
“Well, at certain points, I don’t trust you either,” Jackson replied.

The date of the City Council vote is not set, but is expected to be held in mid-January.

TAGS: 197-c, Manhattanville, ULURP

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28590

University Senate Discusses Growth

2007-12-13T11:46:00.000-05:00

University Senate Discusses Growth
By Shane Ferro
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 13, 2007

Columbia’s physical and economic growth dominated discussion at the final University Senate meeting Thursday in Schermerhorn, where about 40 senators received reports on the progress of Manhattanville plans and the University’s endowment.

President Bollinger opened the meeting with an update on the Manhattanville expansion, reporting that plans are in the final stages of approval, awaiting only a City Council vote which should take place by mid-January. Bollinger also discussed the controversial issue of eminent domain and the accommodation of residents that live in the Manhattanville neighborhood. "The city is very accommodating as far these people and their lives," he said.

University finances were also major focus of the meeting. The University's Budget Office’s recent quarterly update showed a 19.7 percent return on investment of endowment funds. That rate of return ranks Columbia in the 88th percentile among peer institutions, said Richard Bulliet, a faculty Senator.

The investment discussion led to a report from the Advisory Committee on Socially Responsible Investing. The group advises the University trustees on ethical and social issues they may be confronted with when investing. So far, they have advised divesting from companies with involvement in Sudan. They have also looked in to Chevron's operations in Ecuador, and have asked the trustees to avoid investing in companies involved in the tobacco business.

The Committee takes suggestions from different groups and organizations, both on campus and in the community. So far, 97% of recommendations have been adopted by the trustees, according to Geoffrey Heal, a member of the committee.

Also on the agenda was a discussion on the Sexual Violence Prevention and Response Program, including an update from the Presidential Advisory Committee on Sexual Assault. The new committee will be launching a campaign in January to promote awareness and decrease the stigma of using sexual assault victim resources on campus.

In addition, the Senate passed a resolution creating a new Institute for Religion, Culture, and Public Life.

TAGS: Lee Bollinger, Manhattanville, university senate

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28593

City Council Statement By Walter South 12Dec07

2007-12-12T19:32:00.000-05:00

City Council Statement
By Walter South 12 Dec 07

Re: CB#9’s 197a Land Use Application and Columbia’s 197c Rezoning Application

My name is Walter South. I am a Member of Community Board #9, Co-Chair of their 197-a Committee, Co-Chair of their Housing and Land Use Committee; hold a Master’s Degree in Urban Planning and currently a Candidate for a Master’s Degree in Historic Preservation.

I testify today very reluctantly. I say this because I have testified throughout the hearings for the EIS, for the ULURP process, for several City Agencies, and for others and frankly not one damn significant change has taken place.

I am a Hoosier, born in Indiana. Unlike a many fancy talking New Yorkers, I tell it like it is.

This is the key to understand this c application is an article which appeared in The Wall Street Journal in October of this year. The article reported that Yale had a profit in their last fiscal year of 4.5 billion dollars on their endowment Funds. Yale’s profit on their endowment last year almost exceeded Columbia’s total endowment!

This is the bottom line rationale for this 197-c application.
Columbia was rated this year by the U.S.News and World Report as 9th among the best schools in the Nation. They rated behind Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, University of Penn, MIT, and even Duke. But, Columbia wants to “belly up to the table with the big boy’s”. There is only one little problem. Columbia cannot even pick up their own tab.

So they have called for a “Hail Mary Play”. Let the Government pick up the tab, so they can score on an end run. Let the City rezone 17 acres for their exclusive use and the City pick up the infrastructure expenses, and let the State ESDC grab the site by Eminent Domain, and then fund the buildings by the NYS Dormitory Authority, and get Federal Research Bio-Tech Grants to pay off the State tax exempt bonds.

And they use as a smokescreen the words “Academic or Campus” to befuddle the City.

What’s in this for Columbia? They get 17 acres, on the cheap, plus all the land under all the streets and sidewalks for free, and furthermore they get to keep all income from any future Patents for their endowment fund.

What’s in this for New York City? Columbia will pay no property taxes, no expenses for police, fire, or sewage usage.

They have made several claims about jobs. Sometimes it is claimed that 6,000 new jobs will be created, sometimes 7,000 sometimes 9,000. Is this in writing? Is there a contract? No: its puffery; its hot air; it’s just a taking point. Are these jobs for the auto mechanics and warehouse employees that are being displaced?

At present Columbia has about 14,000 employees.
(According to unpublished internal documents) Of this number about 3,500 teach and about 10,500 are in support and administration. (This includes a very large Patent Office). If they create 6,000 jobs this means an increase of 43% in employees. If the number of students is not increasing how is this increase to be paid for? It is going to be paid for from Government funds and/or the private business sector: hence their Business Park

Matter of fact, at present over 27% of Columbia students are foreign students. This is one of the largest percentages of foreign students of any college in this country. Columbia’s mission is to educate the elite of the world-not our kids. Would this same amount of money going to City College, make our City better?

Lastly, how does Columbia justify their need to develop this exclusive office park? By claiming that they need to build a seven story deep, 17 acre bathtub, in a known geological fault. We know, in some cases, bedrock is at least 280 feet. In this tub they propose about 18 high rise buildings. (According to the City Planning Web Site.)

Of course, this bathtub is a complete fantasy. When the bill for this tub comes in, and the logistics for moving probably 100,000 trucks of this dirty dirt out of the City is clarified -it will never be built. In the meantime, the City has been snookered!

And of course to guarantee the success of this land grab, the University, has basically paid for much of the work by the State ESDC, and asks for the right to use Eminent Domain to take site control. They want to steal someone’s private property for their own exclusive use.

This proposal is unjust, immoral, unethical, and contrary to the rights as set forth in our Bill of Rights and Constitution.

Our Community welcomes Columbia to expand. If they want to go into business, we have no problem. But, let it be a level playing field. Let them buy land on the open market.Let the market decide if their business venture warrants their investment. After all Harvard is expanding with no Eminent Domain. University of Penn has expanded without Eminent Domain. NYU has expanded without Eminent Domain.

The Council should require City Planning to adopt the 197-a plan of CB#9 which allows the applicant to expand while respecting and preserving a richly diverse community. The Council must eject any forced evictions. The Council should embrace the significance of historic preservation of Old Manhattanville. The Council must require the applicant to integrate within the community, not bulldoze it. We want Columbia to be a part of the Community, not apart from the Community.

Issue of Eminent Domain May Hinder Columbia in Harlem

2007-12-12T07:49:00.000-05:00

Issue of Eminent Domain May Hinder Columbia in Harlem
By GRACE RAUH

Staff Reporter of the Sun

December 12, 2007

A fight over the use of eminent domain is shaping up at City Hall, as the City Council approaches a vote on Columbia University's plan to expand its campus by 17 acres in Harlem.

Although the council is not explicitly deciding whether the university could use eminent domain to acquire land for its desired expansion, several council members said eminent domain would be at the heart of hearings on Columbia's proposed rezoning, because approval from the council would pave the way for its use. The hearings begin today.

Columbia is planning to spend $6 billion to expand into an area that includes a few properties the university has not been able to purchase.

The chairman of the Zoning and Franchises Committee, Council Member Tony Avella, said he couldn't support a plan that would lead to the use of eminent domain to seize property.

"You can't ignore the fact that what you do will affect, down the line, the use of eminent domain," Mr. Avella said, adding that he would argue at City Hall that eminent domain can't be divorced from the rezoning Columbia wants.

"When you play chess, you look at several moves down the line. You don't just look at the move you are making," he said. "Clearly we are going to set the stage for the use of eminent domain if they can't reach a settlement."

He said if eminent domain were left unchecked, it would jeopardize every property owner in the city.

Council Member Robert Jackson, who represents the area Columbia wants to rezone, said he is concerned about the benefits the project could bring his district and is not focused on defending the property owners who could lose their buildings through eminent domain.

"Columbia has said they are willing to negotiate with the remaining land owners," Mr. Jackson said, suggesting that the issue may be resolved without legal action. "I'm hoping that a consensus can be reached."

Council Member Letitia James said she was not yet sure how she would vote, but noted that eminent domain would be weighed heavily in her decision.

"I'm obviously very concerned about the abuse of eminent domain in the city of New York," Ms. James said. "That is a major obstacle in my support for this project."

The question of eminent domain has taken a front seat in city politics recently in connection with several high-profile projects. In Brooklyn, residents sued developer Bruce Ratner over the Atlantic Yards development, which Ms. James opposed, citing an abuse of eminent domain laws to force them from their homes.

In Queens, a proposed development at Willets Point threatens to become a battleground for eminent domain, as local businesses say they will not sell their property.

The Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo v. New London decision allows for cities to invoke eminent domain for private economic development.

http://www.nysun.com/article/67893

ED Seeks Council Viagra

2007-12-12T07:37:00.000-05:00

The Neighborhood Retail Alliance
Protecting Neighborhood Business For Over 20 Years
Wednesday, December 12, 2007

ED Seeks Council Viagra
In today's NY Sun, the paper reports on the first City Council hearing on the Columbia University expansion plan. In the Sun's take the issue of eminent domain may roil the entire expansion plan: "A fight over the use of eminent domain is shaping up at City Hall, as the City Council approaches a vote on Columbia University's plan to expand its campus by 17 acres in Harlem."

Perhaps, but unfortunately our take is that the taking of people's property will not be the salient issue at play-except for a handful of council members-as the expansion plan gets evaluated during the city council review process. Tony Avella, among all 51 members of the body, is the only council member who is certain to oppose the project on the eminent domain grounds.

The area's local representative, Council member Jackson had this to say to the Sun: "Columbia has said they are willing to negotiate with the remaining land owners," Mr. Jackson said, suggesting that the issue may be resolved without legal action. "I'm hoping that a consensus can be reached." The key here will be the extent to which the university exhibits good faith.

As we stand at this hour there are some discussions going on behind the scenes on a number of key fronts-and they all involve the proposed swap of properties that has been advanced by our client Nick Sprayregen. The swap proposal is important because it addresses some of the key deficiencies of the expansion plan.

With all due respects to the salience of the ED issue, the expansion proposal's most prominent failure lies with its inability to confront-and to mitigate-the issue of direct and indirect displacement; an issue that lies at the heart of the EIS, and is therefore directly correlated to the land use process. What is Columbia doing about the potential displacement of 5,000 local residents?

This is the issue that should concern Messrs Jackson and Dickens, the lawmakers whose constituents will be the ones in the path of the CU bulldozer. And it is precisely, the swap plan that addresses this in at least a partially effective manner. If through the swap, we can build almost 1,000 units of affordable and workforce housing than there will be at least partial mitigation of the gentrifying tsunami that's known as Columbia expansion.

In the next few days, the shape of the negotiations will become clearer, and we will see if the elected officials and the university are able to advance this concept for the good of all of the stakeholders. We're cautiously optimistic.

# posted by Neighborhood Retail Alliance @ 6:59 AM

http://momandpopnyc.blogspot.com/2007/12/ed-seeks-council-viagra.html

CM Brewer & Broadband Advisory Committee Public Hearing 12Dec07

2007-12-12T01:55:00.000-05:00

Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, Chairman
Manhattan Community Board 9
Before

Council Member gale Brewer and
the Broadband Advisory Committee
Wednesday, December 12, 2007

At Manhattan School of Music

Good morning, my name is Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, Chair of Manhattan Community Board 9. I wish to thank CM Gale Brewer and the Broadband Advisory Committee for conducting this important hearing in WestSide Harlem.

Only 787 out of 2000 businesses in West Harlem have computers. This is based on surveys conducted for Reference USA. West Harlem wants to build its infrastructure to fit 21st century needs and serve residents and businesses.

We acknowledge that we have a digital divide - a gap between people who have access and use information and communication technologies and those who don't.

According to the Center for an Urban Future, the city's telecom infrastructure is among the most advanced in the world, and some of the globe's most technology-savvy businesses are based here. The vast majority of businesses located in Manhattan's two central business districts-midtown and downtown-enjoy multiple options for broadband.

But in many of the industrial parks and other low density commercial areas around the five boroughs, businesses continue to face extremely limited options for obtaining broadband, and often find it downright impossible to access a reliable high-speed connection.

In most cases, small companies are left with just one option: DSL. In theory, DSL should be more than sufficient, and its lower cost makes it a first choice for many small firms. But service interruptions and systematic problems--ranging from antiquated telecommunications infrastructure to an absence of real competition among providers--render DSL a constant source of headaches.

In order to attract diverse businesses, we need the latest technologies. West Harlem lacks this diversity. For example the businesses that make-up zip-code 10031 have:

67 restaurants
44 grocery stores
65 beauty salons
59 health care professionals
37 real estate services
30 churches

50% of these establishments are struggling. In our 197-a plan, we recommend a cultural arts district and light manufacturing that is more modern and sustainable. Such businesses need technology. But residents and schools in our area need more accessibility in order to prepare residents to either enter a more advanced workforce, or participate in community or civic life.

CB 9 also falls under mobile telecommunications franchise Zone B. These zones were determined by calculating the percentage of residents in a neighborhood that had telephone service as of the 2000 U.S. Census. Specifically, any neighborhood with over 5% of homes without telephone service would fall under Zone C; all other neighborhoods outside Manhattan's central business district (Zone A) would fall under Zone B. Yet our demographics are the same in Central Harlem (CB10) and East Harlem (CB11)

Therefore getting better services for our community would be more challenging and discourage minority business participation in the contracts and a lack of understanding for minority businesses needing service. The minimum compensation in Zone B is $50 per pole/month.

Because we have Columbia University, Barnard, Teacher's College and City College, it can appear that our small businesses are thriving but that is not the case. We are advocating that the northern portion of the district be re-zoned to a "C" classification to offer more parity and to help our community better negotiate for better services with qualified, established and financially sound telecommunication providers.

Bronx neighborhoods make loudest list

2007-12-11T18:40:00.000-05:00

December 11, 12:22 pm

NYC noise complaints rise

Hamilton Heights, Bushwick/Bedford-Stuyvesant and Flatbush are the three loudest neighborhoods in the city, according to complaints filed with the city's 311 Citizen Service Center. The Bronx's Williamsbridge and Wakefield sections were fourth on the list, with nearly 2,000 complaints made from July to November of 2007. The city received 135,589 complaints in the same period, a 13 percent increase from last year. Residents blame house parties that charge illegal admission and alcohol fees. more [NYDN]

http://www.therealdeal.net/breaking_news/2007/12/11/1197400937.php

Bronx neighborhoods make loudest list
BY DORIAN BLOCK DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Tuesday, December 11th 2007, 4:00 AM

Stop all that racket, Williamsbridge and Wakefield!

Those northern Bronx neighborhoods are some of the loudest places in the five boroughs, according to callers complaining to the city's 311 system.

Community Board 12 had the fourth-highest number of noise complaints of all neighborhoods in the city, with almost 2,000 from July to Nov. 20 of this year, according to the 311 Citizen Service Center.

The only places with more noise complaints are Hamilton Heights in Manhattan, followed by Flatbush, then Bushwick/Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn.

"That doesn't surprise me," said Carmen Rosa, district manager of Community Board 12. "The first major problem is, during the summer and spring, we have massive construction that has been going on throughout our district. Huge trucks and machines, even on Sundays, are working without a proper permit.

"The other is noise from parties. We were seeing an influx of backyard house parties. People are charging admission and selling liquor, which is illegal."

Noisy neighbors are the top offenders for high volume citywide, according to 311 complaints.
Mary Lauro of Matilda Ave. said she personally made about seven complaints this year and, as president of the Wakefield Taxpayers Association, assisted dozens of others who called her to complain about noisy parties.

"In the past, people would have garden parties with guitars, maybe the radio going. Sometimes you would open your window to let the guitar or whatnot come in, but now your whole house shakes," she said. "You can hear it from down and up the block and around the corner."

Lauro said the proliferation of amplifiers and hired deejays for house parties turns her neighborhood into a club zone on Friday and Saturday nights and that runs until late Saturday and Sunday mornings.

Lauro said she believes that new arrivals from the Caribbean, accustomed to blasting music in their old countries, have carried the tradition on here.

Rosa attributes the noise more to youth than cultural differences.

"You have a changing of the guard so to speak. You have a younger population," she said. "The difference is what they believe is music and what is reasonable noise. It is not easy to get adjusted to if you are not used to it."

Rosa praised the 47th Precinct for tracking street flyers and ads to identify house and bar parties before they get too loud, but she said the low police staffing numbers makes it difficult.
Citywide, noise is the No. 1 complaint to the 311 system. From July to Nov. 20, the city received a total of 135,589 complaints, a 13% increase over the same period last year.
Nabes make list

of city's noisiestWelcome to N.Y. racket club

3 comments so far. Add your comment below!.

ny rikan guy Dec 12, 2007 2:59:33 AM if you want to blame the carribean for the noise then blame the guiknees for the mob, blame the spanish for missing hubcaps and blame the blacks for waiting for a black out to steal from the stores and loot....

ChrisDesDav3 Dec 13, 2007 8:57:38 AM (ny rikan guy) I'm a Nueyorican, I'm 27 year olds, live in the Bronx, AND I DON'T PLAY RIDICOLOUS MUSIC AND DISTURB OTHERS. WHY??? I'ts because I have consideration and RESPECT!!! There have been plenty of times when I've thrown parties in my home for my children for birthday parties, a housewarming, boxing fights, or just to have a good time! What's the difference? I tell my neighbors, tell the time it's going to end, invite them, and/or cut it at a decent time, and NO, I DON'T NEED THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD LISTENING TO MY MUSIC, the party is in my home, not the block!!!! Get real, we're from the Caribbean and quite frankly, DON'T FRONT! OUR PEOPLE (CARRIBEAN) love music, and yes we like it loud. Who could blame us?! Our music is great, rich, and has so much emotion into it... it's defenitely real music, BUT, BUT, in NY, unlike the Carribeean, we have code of conduct laws regarding noise AND WE STICK to it b/c unlike Puerto Rico, for example, who refuse to pay taxes and wonder

ChrisDesDav3 Dec 13, 2007 9:01:31 AM continued... and wonder why there are corrupt and have an overwelming murder and drug rate... so why should they care. In NY, however, we DO pay taxes, insane rent/mortgages, and other out of control bills... so now we can't complain about noise?? WE will continue to complain until neighbors respect the lifestyle of hard working, tax paying citizens!!!! We will take advantage of our code of conduct laws regarding noise! Don't like it or feel offended.. you can always go back to PR and live the way you want there and play OUR music all day long and No ONE will tell you anything!

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/bronx/2007/12/11/2007-12-11_bronx_neighborhoods_make_loudest_list.html

CB9M Resolution on the 125th Street River to River Re-zoning

2007-12-10T23:55:00.000-05:00

J. Reyes-Montblanc, Chairman .......................,,......... L. T. McClean, District Manager

December 7, 2007

Resolution on the 125th Street River to River Re-zoning

Hon. Amanda Burden

Chair

City Planning Commission

22 Reade Street

New York, New York, 10007-1216

Re: Application # C080099ZMM

Dear Commissioner Burden:

At its Special Meeting Meeting held on Wednesday December 5, 2007 Community Board No. 9 Manhattan voted the following resolution re: The 125th Street River to River Rezoning by a vote of 19 in favor, 3 opposeed and 5 abstentions:

WHEREAS the Department of City Planning put forth an application for the rezoning of 125th Street in Manhattan to cover the area from 124th to 126th Street between Broadway and Second Ave. and;

WHEREAS the Department of City Planning submitted the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on September 28, 2007 and certified this application on October 1st, 2007, and;

WHEREAS the area on 125th street from St. Nicholas Avenue to Broadway falls within the purview of Manhattan Community Board 9 and therefore subject to the ULURP process of Manhattan Community Board 9, and;

WHEREAS the 60-day period for community board review under the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP) commenced on October 10th, 2007, and:

WHEREAS Manhattan Community Board 9 held a public hearing in accordance with ULURP rules on December 3, 2007, and;

WHEREAS the Community Board expects that the current proposed plan for a C4-4D, R7A and R7-2 (with C2-4 commercial overlays) districts along 125th Street from Broadway to Morningside Ave. will not allow for sufficient commercial space, and;

WHEREAS, the city’s proposed R7-2 and R7-A zoning designations were meant to protect existing residents, but unduly restricted commercial development; and

WHEREAS Community Board 9 supports the development of affordable housing onsite that is targeted and periodically adjusted to the income levels of Community Board 9 under the following guidelines:

· 20% at 60% or less than AMI
· 40% at 60-100% AMI
· 40% at 100-120% AMI

WHEREAS Community Board 9 has sought to preserve light manufacturing in West Harlem in accordance with its 197-a plan and recommendations, and;

WHEREAS Community Board 9 voted unanimously to support a mix of businesses coupled with arts, culture and creative services as defined by the Standard Industrial Categories (SIC) in the New Amsterdam Special District and;

WHEREAS the benefits of the 125th Street Special District applies primarily to the Core Subdistrict that is contained in Community Board 10, therefore;

BE IT RESOLVED that the ULURP Committee recommends to the full board of Community Board 9 to vote to support the Department of City Planning’s Land Use Review Application for the 125th Street Corridor Rezoning (Application #N080100 ZRM); if the following conditions are met:

(1)The Department of City Planning expand its current rezoning plan and amend the Draft Environmental Impact Statement to include the “New Amsterdam Special District”, which will cover the area from the south side of 126th Street to 130th Street between Amsterdam and Morningside/Convent Aves, and be zoned C6-3 (with a Base of 4 FAR, and 4 FAR Bonus for Inclusionary Housing or Arts/Cultural uses, totaling a Max of 8 FAR), with height limitations of 160ft. and

(2)The rezoning plan for both sides of 125th street from St. Nicholas to Broadway be changed to a C6-2A designation (with a Base of 4 FAR, and 3.2 FAR Bonus for Inclusionary Housing or Arts/Cultural uses, totaling a Max of 7.2 FAR), with a height limitation of 120ft instead of the current C4-4D, R7A and R7-2 (with C2-4 commercial overlays) designations,

(3)The proposed Arts and Culture bonus be extended to cover the area of the rezoning west of Convent Ave./Morningside Ave, to Broadway in order that the entire 125th Street corridor serve as an arts and culture district;

(4)The Arts and Culture bonus give indigenous qualifying businesses and individuals an incentive to own property;

(5)Due to the increase in development potential brought on by the proposed C6-2A and C6-3 designations, anti-harassment and cure provisions be instituted within the Special 125th Street District that are modeled on Article IX: Special Purpose Districts, Chapter 6: Special Clinton District, Section 96-110 in order to ensure that while attracting new development to Community Board 9, safeguards will be in place to prevent displacement of long-time residents.

(6)All housing developed in the proposed 125th Street Special District as recommended by Community Board 9 be affordable housing onsite and only within the site of rezoning that is targeted to the income levels of CB9, as periodically adjusted, according to the following guidelines:
· 20% at 60% or less than AMI
· 40% at 60-100% AMI
· 40% at 100-120% AMI

(7) Consistent streetscape design for the entire 125th Street corridor (i.e., lighting, benches, trash receptacles) to visually unify the districts affected;.

(8) Consistent with Community Board 9’s 197-a plan and recommendations, the rezoning application includes building code requirements that meet or exceeds Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver standard as specified by the U.S. Green Buildings Council (USGBC) as per the goals of the Mayor’s PlaNYC 2030; and

(9)The proposed Arts & Entertainment Requirement be changed to a Local Business Requirement. Qualifying local businesses are defined as businesses indigenous to Community Boards 9, 10, or 11, or those registered as minority, woman, disabled or disadvantaged-owned businesses, and not members in a national chain.

(10) That the CB9M considers the preservation and Landmarking of buildings identified in CB9M’s 197-a Plan to be of prime importance and desire and that the complete transportation infrastructure serving 125th Street be further studied and the traffic congestion mitigated to insure the smooth development of the 125th Street corridor.

Going Green in Harlem

2007-12-10T23:15:00.000-05:00

WHITE ELEPHANTS UNITE

Going Green in Harlem
Posted on December 8, 2007 by hermanwong

The limestone bricks of the four-story townhouse at 459 West 140th Street have faded to a muted brown and gray. Its windows have been boarded or cemented shut with cinder blocks, the front entrance is shuttered with a metal gate, and its locks are a rusty green. The weeds springing from the cracked steps are the only signs of life. To pedestrians, the abandoned house reeks of decay, but change is coming.

The owners of the townhouse, the Harlem-based environmental group West Harlem Environmental Action, or WE ACT, have ambitious plans to make the 19th century house into a 21st century center for environmentalism. Eco-friendly buildings have sprung up throughout the city, but often at addresses far south of Harlem. WE ACT’s new headquarters, to be called the Environmental Justice Center of New York, will bring Harlem its first green non-profit community center when it opens in 2009, and only the second green building in West Harlem (the other is a residential complex). But instead of another monument to the Toyota Prius school of environmentalism — where buying green products and going carbon neutral has become the latest in lifestyle choice — the converted townhouse aspires to reflect the unique concerns of environmental activism in West Harlem, where warding off climate change takes a back seat to the more immediate realities of pollution and health.

“At every turn we make an effort to make sure people understand we’re not doing this because it’s chic and the green thing of the moment to be doing,” said Cecil Corbin-Mark, 37, WE ACT’s director of programs. “We understand that this community is literally struggling to breathe because of all the diesel bus depots or the sewage treatment plant or whatever else is in the neighborhood.”

The plans for the new headquarters promise to bring the latest in green technologies to Harlem. The roof features a system to collect rainwater for reuse in the building, saving water. The glass atrium channels light inside while a geothermal heating and cooling system keeps the facility at a moderate temperature, cutting power consumption. An energy efficient elevator carries visitors to the two new floors, which expand the house from its current size of slightly over 6,000 square feet to 7,100 square feet.

Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, chairman of the local community board, welcomed the new building. “It’s a good example of what our constituency can do to be green,” Reyes-Montblanc said. “We hope [WE ACT] can be copied by more people.”

WE ACT took title of the townhouse in 2004 from the Department of Housing Preservation and Development. The cost of construction is estimated at between $2.5 to $2.7 million, with raised $1.2 million so far. Most of the money has come from current and former elected officials with Harlem connections, such as former borough president C. Virginia Fields and council member Robert Jackson. WE ACT is still reaching out to officials and also residents.

In Harlem, environmental activism often rises from health concerns. New York City’s asthma rate has always been higher than the national average, but residents of Harlem face a more severe problem. In 2005 the Harlem Hospital Center found that the disease afflicted nearly a third of the children under 13 that it tested within a 60-block radius, twice the national average.

WE ACT believes the high asthma rate comes from the poor air quality in the neighborhood, and has waged air pollution campaigns against the local sewage treatment plant and fought New York City’s transportation authority over the number of bus depots – six of the city’s seven – in Northern Manhattan.

The environmental group will connect the new building to the realities of people living in the community, Corbin-Mark said. It hired Harlem-based AQC Architects, an architectural firm, for the design, and wishes to use local workers in the construction. The center will have non-toxic materials and paints so that visitors with certain allergies and chemical sensitivities can breath easier. There will be youth center and a library shelved with books on the environment and health. The building’s innovative technology and design, from the rainwater collection system and solar panels to the central light shaft that will bring in natural light, will be models of conservation and an environmentally friendly living space in Harlem.

“LEED Gold doesn’t mean anything to most residents in Harlem,” said, Corbin-Mark, who has lived his entire life at Convent Avenue and West 142nd Street, two blocks from WE ACT’s townhouse. “But if you say this building will reduce the number of asthma attacks that your kids have when they come here, that makes sense to them.”

Betty Case, 67, who has lived for 43 years in an apartment half a block from the proposed site of the new center, had heard of WE ACT, but was not aware of the coming headquarters. Case doesn’t know anything about green buildings or much about global warming. “It has something to do with the weather, right,” Case said. But she is open-minded about the center. “If it’s going to improve the neighborhood, I think it’s nice,” Case said.

The house has been abandoned since the 1980s and looks it. Bordering the campus of City College of New York, the townhouse at present is as far from green as imaginable. Fragments of plaster cover the floors, a shelf of disheveled books sits long untouched and dusty, and a shopping cart rests by the living room fireplace. The only light filters down from the hole where the roof collapsed in the back of the house.

WE ACT plans to restore what it can. To earn the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council, WE ACT will reuse all salvageable materials to produce less garbage. And a preservation motive will ensure the façade and the existing fireplaces and skylight will be part of the new center.

“We don’t want to rob the historic character of this building in our effort to make this a 21st century facility and office,” Corbin-Mark said. “We are committed that what is part of the historical fabric of Harlem is still preserved as well.”

Filed under: Environmentalism and Low Income Neighborhoods Tagged: asthma, environmentalism, going green, Harlem, health, LEED, pollution

http://hermanwong.wordpress.com/2007/12/08/going-green-in-harlem/

Council to Vote On CU Expansion

2007-12-10T13:15:00.000-05:00

Council to Vote On CU Expansion
By Betsy Morais
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 10, 2007

The public review process for Columbia’s proposed Manhattanville development is entering its final stages. As the City Council gears up to give the last word, despite continued opposition, the outlook is positive for Columbia.

Columbia’s 197-c plan, which would allow for a new campus in Manhattanville, and Community Board 9’s 197-a—an alternative framework for future development in West Harlem—have reached their final stage of consideration in the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure. The City Council will commence its hearings on the plans Wednesday morning at the subcommittee meeting for Planning, Dispositions & Concessions and Zoning & Franchises. Once the council believes it has sufficiently scrutinized Columbia’s 197-c and CB9’s 197-a proposals, it will hold a final vote, most likely within the first two weeks of January.

“City Council will pass the Columbia plan, there’s no doubt in my mind,” Hope Cohen, deputy director of the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Rethinking Development, said.

Cohen predicts that the council will approve modified versions 197-c and 197-a, similar to the City Planning Commission decision that approved both with changes. “If City Planning found a way to approve both, City Council will find a way to approve both,” she said.

Although debate among council members is in its early stages, Wednesday morning’s subcommittee meeting “should be the hottest,” Cohen explained, since most of the action the council takes occurs at the subcommittee level.

Councilman Robert Jackson, D-West Harlem, who represents the expansion zone, is a member of the Land Use subcommittee on Zoning & Franchises. He will vote for CB9’s 197-a plan but is unsure of his position on Columbia’s 197-c, according to his chief of staff, Susan Russell.

Jackson “embraces the notion of Columbia expansion,” Russell said, but is not prepared to take a definitive stance until hearing the University’s testimony. Still, Cohen said she suspects Jackson will come out in favor of Columbia’s plan.

Inez Dickens, D-Harlem, also a member of the subcommittee, has not stated her positions on either rezoning proposal, but she has expressed her desire for strong community benefits. “This is a very volatile situation because there are so many people’s lives who are affected,” Dickens’ spokesperson Lynette Velasco said.

Columbia is currently in negotiations with the West Harlem Local Development Corporation to form a Community Benefits Agreement to accompany its expansion plan, and it is likely that they will reach an agreement before the Council’s final vote in January. The announcement of a CBA may make it easier politically for Council members to vote in favor of Columbia’s plan. With the recent resignation of three of Columbia’s most vocal critics from the LDC, it is likely that the elected officials on the board will have a strong influence in determining the outcome of the CBA process.

Displacement has been central in Manhattanville debate, particularly in light of the potential use of eminent domain to acquire property for Columbia. The University has promised not to use eminent domain on residential properties, but with the state’s consent, eminent domain could be used on commercial properties whose owners have refused to sell. City Council members are likely to raise concerns about eminent domain as they review the University’s plan, despite the fact that their ULURP vote is not directly related to eminent domain use.

Zoning & Franchises subcommittee Chair Tony Avella, D-Queens and a candidate for mayor, has been engaged in the Manhattanville debate as a proponent of community involvement in planning decisions. Critical of many of his colleagues, Avella has introduced legislation calling for a stronger neighborhood voice in the rezoning process, expressed his support of CB9’s 197-a, and has called President Lee Bollinger an “eminent domain abuser.”

TAGS: 197-c, City Council, Manhattanville Expansion Plan

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/28573