Everyone is outraged with the Economic Development Corporation (EDC) right now. Seriously — everyone. The community (except for a fringe group advocating for more housing). Members of Teamsters Local 814. Maritime experts. Community groups. City councilmembers. State assemblymembers. The Brooklyn Borough President. The Public Advocate. The Comptroller. Even a sitting Congressperson who no longer represent the district due to redistricting.
And who can blame them.
As frustrated and exhausted residents of Red Hook and surrounding neighborhoods await the Brooklyn Marine Terminal (BMT) Task Force’s vote on a master plan for the BMT redevelopment, the city’s Economic Development Corporation — as well as Rep Dan Goldman, in a misleading and out-of-touch-with-reality op-ed in the March 30 edition of the New York Daily News — continues to take the community for fools.
It remains difficult to predict the vote. Task Force members Karen Blondel from the Red Hook Houses and Frankie Agosta, from the longshoreman’s union, have recently come out in favor. The EDC has unleashed their propaganda machine in full force throughout citywide media.
Since May of last year, EDC, on behalf of Mayor Eric Adams and his administration, has willfully pretended to engage in a “community-led” planning process, even as the final destination from the very beginning was largely predetermined. On its way, the quasi-public non-profit has trumpeted the support of not just Rep. Goldman, but also task force member Frank Agosta, president of Local 1814 of the ILA and Mike Stamatis, president of Red Hook Container Terminal. The latter two have no choice, they are just hoping to stay connected to the BMT in some form, and Goldman remains out of touch with his constituents as he seeks national power.
This process — which Councilmember Shahana Hanif called “obscene” and “offensive” at a rally on Thursday, April 3 — has provoked the ire of many task force members, elected officials and a community left outside the decision-making process, and criticism has come from every direction. In recent months, neighbors of the marine terminal have begun taking to the streets (and in many cases, meeting halls) to protest the planning process and the luxury housing that EDC has bulldozed into the vision plan.
As we detailed in the January issue of the Star-Revue, housing was a core part of EDC’s vision for the new BMT from the day the project was announced in May of last year — although the EDC didn’t say it out loud until December. That is when market-rate housing and luxury condos were presented as a necessity to cover the $3.5 billion that, based on EDC’s calculations, redeveloping the site would cost.
These numbers, not backed up by anything but their word, includes $1.2 billion to demolish finger piers 8, 9a and 9b and build a marginal pier in their place, nearly $300 million to repair the other piers, over $386 million in other site infrastructure and over $700 million in resiliency upgrades and what real estate developers, in concert with government, now use to describe parks — the “public realm.”
For a community that for months, in workshop after workshop, had made it abundantly clear it did not want real estate developers to get control over the city’s last bit of working waterfront, this came as quite a shock, given EDC’s stated commitment to a “community-driven” process.
Starting in February, community organizers began bringing residents together to discuss the future of the Brooklyn Marine Terminal. Elected officials, like City Councilmember Alexa Avilés and State Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon, also began voicing their concerns publicly.
As the task force vote grew closer, EDC and the City continued to blatantly disregard any input that didn’t fit their agenda; this included requests form task force members for a significantly longer planning process, more transparency, more time for discussions during meetings and better responsiveness to questions, as well as calls from the public to involve them in a meaningful way and to not build luxury housing on public land. EDC seemed almost impervious to criticism, given how confidently its officials presented at the last public workshop, held at the end of March in the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal in front of a visibly agitated audience.
The community-led resistance was, however, gaining significant traction. And perhaps EDC felt this too, as President Andrew Kimball told Crain’s on Thursday, April 3, with just a week before the vote, that it would be postponed by two or three weeks.
Or maybe, as Rep. Jerry Nadler, a longtime supporter of the Red Hook shipping industry, told the crowd at the April 3 rally: “They don’t have the votes.”
It remains difficult to predict the vote. Task Force members Karen Blondel from the Red Hook Houses and Frankie Agosta, from the longshoreman’s union, have recently come out in favor. The EDC has unleashed their propaganda machine in full force throughout citywide media. But one thing is clear:
There is no chance the task force will reach consensus. And if we are to believe the task force members who spoke at the rally, it won’t pass the two-thirds vote (which happens if consensus is not reached), either.
“They’re pushing the task force to vote on a plan that has no details,” Councilmember Hanif said.
“Were not going to let this go through,” she added to a cheering crowd.
Her City Council colleague Alexa Avilés also made it clear where she stood, saying, “The notion that luxury housing must pay for public good — is wrong.”
Antonio Reynoso did not mince words, either, facetiously calling EDC the Residential Development Corporation. “I can’t vote yes on a project the community doesn’t know anything about,” he said, adding that the public can’t possible know enough when he, the top public official in the borough, doesn’t even have enough information. “We’re not relying on the experts,” Reynoso said.
Jim Tampakis, one of the task force’s maritime experts and owner of Richard Street’s Marine Spares International, shared what he envisioned for the site, and added, as he was leaving the podium, that he, of course, would vote no.
Nadler, who is not on the task force, criticized that the project will go through New York State’s development-friendly GPP process, rather than New York City’s community-centered ULURP process.
“It’s a shortcut around the community and I don’t like that at all,” he said. “I think the task force should vote no.”
On April 2, City Comptroller Brad Lander sent out a press release urging the task force to vote to delay the the final approval.
Community Board 6 has criticized the EDC for royally fumbling the planning process, identifying nearly two dozen issues, including financial assumptions, inappropriate use of luxury housing for cross-subsidies and lack of transparency.
A survey conducted by the Cobble Hill Association — it’s president, Amanda Sue Nichols, is a member of the task force — also found, predictably, that “housing was among one of the least supported uses for the site.”
Given all this, EDC appears to have few options other than to delay the final decision further, unless it decides to overrule the task force. And while some, like Rep. Goldman and State Sen. Andrew Gounardes (chair and vice-chair on the task force, respectively), have said that the task force has final approval, it is far from a given, considering the politics involved.
Author
I’m a New York-based journalist from Sweden. I write about the environment, how climate change impacts us humans, and how we are responding.
