The great basketball swindle

[hondaaccord]

http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/11/t ... ll-swindle

Article about how Bruce Ratner abused New York eminent domain law to seize land for personal profit.

I am not trying to troll, just wanted opinions from Nets fans.

[BOONE SQUAD]

Hawley’s riveting new documentary Battle for Brooklyn, which tells the story of the Atlantic Yards land grab largely through the eyes of property owner Daniel Goldstein

This fool again?

Oh and the new arena is going to be sick.

[NyCeEvO]

Unfortunately, this stuff happens all of the time with big corporations vs. individuals. I always hope that the tenants of these places are compensated somewhat fairly.

[Preludepunk27]

I've had many discussions over eminent domain and it's gotten pretty heated I'll tell you that much.

The problem is, this article as well as probably the documentary is completely one sided. Yes, he's lucky he has some high profile people in his corner and I would agree he abused Eminent Domain; however, he DID NOT break the law. Maybe I go Scalia when it comes to this but abusing the law and breaking the law are two different things. I abuse my dog every day but shining a light on the wall and watch him bark at it, but I'm not breaking any animal cruelty laws.

Even in this article, they left out some important details that paints the picture a little better and makes Ratner and his actions seem reasonable. I'm at work and seriously too lazy to dig up this skeleton of an argument again though.

What's laughable is the argument about a bridge or tunnel. If the state built something like that, they'd open up a toll wouldn't they? Would they take out the toll after the project was fully paid off? HELL NO. All projects on this scale are only done with profit in mind. They just have really good PR people spinning it to make you believe it's for the good of the community.

As for the MTA bailing Ratner out on spreading out the payment, do you believe terms of contracts are never renegotiated? It takes two sides to agree to renegotiations as well. If people were angry, they should have brought class action suits against the MTA and called for the heads of its leaders. Shoot me in the head over this argument.

As for the courts ruling, they did not pass over it. Judges don't make decisions on what they believe is right or wrong. They rule based on law. They did not pass over this, more so they said that they can't rule against Ratner because they would be putting personal judgement in the case rather than rule based on the law itself. Congress are the ones that would have to make this change to the legislation if they want this to never happen again.

Also what's amusing is that Goldstein got a damn 7 figure check from Ratner in the end. I'm sure he's living in a much nicer apartment now.

If you don't feel like reading my rant read this: I am not defending Ratner here. I am defending Law. There is a difference and there is no emotional attachment in law, which this article and I'm sure the documentary pushes you to think. I most certaintly wish it went down differently but it is what it is now. If someone is this unhappy, get off your behind and call your local elected official and complain to them about adjusting the Eminent Domain law in New York so this abuse won't happen again. Blame your government for not having stricter laws, not Ratner for using the ambiguity to his advantage.

[SteveNets15]

He'll be coming out with a book soon you'll see.

[enetric]

Isnt that the dude who held out to the last second and then got the biggest check for his land per sq. foot than anyone else?

Either way? My opinion is a selfish one....

"Movin's on up...to the east side...we finally got a piece of the pie!"

[BOONE SQUAD]

Isnt that the dude who held out to the last second and then got the biggest check for his land per sq. foot than anyone else?

Yes.

[Preludepunk27]

Isnt that the dude who held out to the last second and then got the biggest check for his land per sq. foot than anyone else?

Either way? My opinion is a selfish one....

"Movin's on up...to the east side...we finally got a piece of the pie!"

He got a $3,000,000.00 for his time. Ironically, I'm sure part of that check paid for part of this documentary in some capacity.

[vincecarter4pres]

I abuse my dog every day by shining a light on the wall and watch him bark at it, but I'm not breaking any animal cruelty laws.

LMAO!

[hondaaccord]

I've had many discussions over eminent domain and it's gotten pretty heated I'll tell you that much.

The problem is, this article as well as probably the documentary is completely one sided. Yes, he's lucky he has some high profile people in his corner and I would agree he abused Eminent Domain; however, he DID NOT break the law. Maybe I go Scalia when it comes to this but abusing the law and breaking the law are two different things. I abuse my dog every day but shining a light on the wall and watch him bark at it, but I'm not breaking any animal cruelty laws.

Even in this article, they left out some important details that paints the picture a little better and makes Ratner and his actions seem reasonable. I'm at work and seriously too lazy to dig up this skeleton of an argument again though.

What's laughable is the argument about a bridge or tunnel. If the state built something like that, they'd open up a toll wouldn't they? Would they take out the toll after the project was fully paid off? HELL NO. All projects on this scale are only done with profit in mind. They just have really good PR people spinning it to make you believe it's for the good of the community.

As for the MTA bailing Ratner out on spreading out the payment, do you believe terms of contracts are never renegotiated? It takes two sides to agree to renegotiations as well. If people were angry, they should have brought class action suits against the MTA and called for the heads of its leaders. Shoot me in the head over this argument.

As for the courts ruling, they did not pass over it. Judges don't make decisions on what they believe is right or wrong. They rule based on law. They did not pass over this, more so they said that they can't rule against Ratner because they would be putting personal judgement in the case rather than rule based on the law itself. Congress are the ones that would have to make this change to the legislation if they want this to never happen again.

Also what's amusing is that Goldstein got a damn 7 figure check from Ratner in the end. I'm sure he's living in a much nicer apartment now.

If you don't feel like reading my rant read this: I am not defending Ratner here. I am defending Law. There is a difference and there is no emotional attachment in law, which this article and I'm sure the documentary pushes you to think. I most certaintly wish it went down differently but it is what it is now. If someone is this unhappy, get off your behind and call your local elected official and complain to them about adjusting the Eminent Domain law in New York so this abuse won't happen again. Blame your government for not having stricter laws, not Ratner for using the ambiguity to his advantage.

The tunnel argument is much sounder argument for use of eminent domain than a private real estate development. A tunnel is a public project that could be argued is necessary for the public good.

A new basketball stadium and real estate development is clearly about one persons private ambition and is not acceptable use of eminent domain.

If you are going to let the government seize any property due to "graffiti, weeds and minor cracks" then you could pretty much seize anything in the whole state of new york.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgdp3XupCo0&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

[vincecarter4pres]

So does that mean the whole city of Camden is up for grabs?

[Preludepunk27]

I've had many discussions over eminent domain and it's gotten pretty heated I'll tell you that much.

The problem is, this article as well as probably the documentary is completely one sided. Yes, he's lucky he has some high profile people in his corner and I would agree he abused Eminent Domain; however, he DID NOT break the law. Maybe I go Scalia when it comes to this but abusing the law and breaking the law are two different things. I abuse my dog every day but shining a light on the wall and watch him bark at it, but I'm not breaking any animal cruelty laws.

Even in this article, they left out some important details that paints the picture a little better and makes Ratner and his actions seem reasonable. I'm at work and seriously too lazy to dig up this skeleton of an argument again though.

What's laughable is the argument about a bridge or tunnel. If the state built something like that, they'd open up a toll wouldn't they? Would they take out the toll after the project was fully paid off? HELL NO. All projects on this scale are only done with profit in mind. They just have really good PR people spinning it to make you believe it's for the good of the community.

As for the MTA bailing Ratner out on spreading out the payment, do you believe terms of contracts are never renegotiated? It takes two sides to agree to renegotiations as well. If people were angry, they should have brought class action suits against the MTA and called for the heads of its leaders. Shoot me in the head over this argument.

As for the courts ruling, they did not pass over it. Judges don't make decisions on what they believe is right or wrong. They rule based on law. They did not pass over this, more so they said that they can't rule against Ratner because they would be putting personal judgement in the case rather than rule based on the law itself. Congress are the ones that would have to make this change to the legislation if they want this to never happen again.

Also what's amusing is that Goldstein got a damn 7 figure check from Ratner in the end. I'm sure he's living in a much nicer apartment now.

If you don't feel like reading my rant read this: I am not defending Ratner here. I am defending Law. There is a difference and there is no emotional attachment in law, which this article and I'm sure the documentary pushes you to think. I most certaintly wish it went down differently but it is what it is now. If someone is this unhappy, get off your behind and call your local elected official and complain to them about adjusting the Eminent Domain law in New York so this abuse won't happen again. Blame your government for not having stricter laws, not Ratner for using the ambiguity to his advantage.

The tunnel argument is much sounder argument for use of eminent domain than a private real estate development. A tunnel is a public project that could be argued is necessary for the public good.

A new basketball stadium and real estate development is clearly about one persons private ambition and is not acceptable use of eminent domain.

If you are going to let the government seize any property due to "graffiti, weeds and minor cracks" then you could pretty much seize anything in the whole state of new york.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgdp3XupCo0&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Again, I'm not trying to defend Ratner in any capacity. I'm defending the law. People are bringing their emotions into how they feel the law should act and that is not how the legal system works.

Listen, if we want to be in a ethical debate, I am 100% on your side the way it happened in (Please Use More Appropriate Word). Ratner is a complete d-bag. I think 99% of Nets fans (myself included) hate him, but I'm debating law. The eminent domain law in new york is structured in such a way that is is deemed too ambiguous which fosters these kinds of problems. My main point is if we want to be technical based on law and disregarding morals or ethics then Ratner did nothing wrong. He just got help from his buddies to use the system in such a way that he got what he wanted.

The judges ruling on the case are not there to decide on a moral contest. They even mentioned in their ruling how the whole thing is kind of weak, but the law is the law and none of them were prepared to rule differently. Ruling differently would set a new precedent on how all future rulings would be decided; however, that could potentially open up a pandora's box where NO progress could ever be made for developing the state. That is a tall order for judges, so blame them for not having balls. They are also just not willing to make rules because that is not what a judge is designed to do. They are there to interpret the situation and base a ruling on the laws and regulations in place. This is why I said if someone's pissed, call your congressmen and leave a voicemail for him/her every day until he/she brings forth legislation to make eminent domain more clear cut.

If you still think it's not an acceptable use of eminent domain, again, that's your OPINION. It's unfortunate because, like I said, if we're talking about morals and ethics I'm in complete agreement. That's just not the way Law works. Dig up the exact language of the Law where Ratner is in 100% violation of eminent domain. If I can defend that any logical way (such as talking about the jobs the project creates, the boost in the local economy, the amount of housing it will still provide when complete, etc) then a judge is going to rule in favor of me every day of the week. I know it's unfair and I agree it is, but that is life. It's happened in New York before and this definitely won't be the last.

With your last statement though, your 100% correct. If anyone had the time, money and plans, you theoretically could seize any part of New York. Most people do not have all 3 of those key components though which is why it doesn't happen.

I've talked too much about the legal ramifications of eminent domain though. I'm getting flashbacks to the day K-Mart got traded. Damn you Ratner!

Again, I really hope nobody takes offense to this. I'd be a lawyer if I scored better on the LSAT. I completely geek out on stuff like this. Ratner is an @$$hole. I'm just saying, in the eyes of the law, he did nothing wrong.

[BOONE SQUAD]

So does that mean the whole city of Camden is up for grabs?

I hope not. I love the Camden State Aquarium.

[vincecarter4pres]

So does that mean the whole city of Camden is up for grabs?

I hope not. I love the Camden State Aquarium.

That's the one where the whales sell crack and the penguins pack glocks right?