Monday, January 14, 2008

A Clear Illustration that Madden's Ruling is a Farce:

Norman Oder writes:

The judge's options

As we know, Madden decided not to even analyze the debate about crime. Given that she had eight months to write the decision, and that laypeople can find the flaws in the crime claims, it would not have been that difficult for the judge to declare doubts about that element of blight.

Thus, Madden could have given some credence to the petitioners' claims that the incidence of blight was overstated, while still affirming that the footprint was blighted.

Or maybe it would have led Madden to rethink her statement that the "blight conditions documented in the Blight Study... provided a rational basis for the ESDC's conclusion that continued new development on the project site was unlikely."

Seriously does any one really believe this? A neighborhood where $700,000 condos were for sale smack in the center of a booming borough wasn't going to be developed? While Ratner and the city abandoned Brooklyn neighborhoods with far worse crime rates were revitalized and now are some of the nicest in the city. By this standard, developers can seize any property they like, anywhere.

This clearly illustrates that the whole process was a rigged farce, manipulated to conform to a pre-determined conclusion: steal property from honest homeowners and give it to a greedy, corrupt developer.

No comments: