Excerpts from REBECCA MEAD’s “MR. BROOKLYN,” a profile of Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz (“the man, the plan, the arena”) that appears in the Apr. 25 issue of the New Yorker and online here.
“…In the car, Markowitz’s cell phone rang, and the voice of a female assistant announced that ‘Bruce’ was on the line.”
“‘Yes, sir, how are you doing, Bruce?’ Markowitz said, picking up the handset and falling silent as he listened. Bruce Ratner, it appeared … had some urgent questions about the way discussions concerning waterfront development in Williamsburg and Greenpoint might affect his own project. Markowitz, whenever he could get a word in, tried to be both conciliatory and upbeat. ‘I understand,’ he said …”
“Across the street, a small huddle of Boerum Hill residents handed Markowitz a sheaf of plans showing an arrangement of planters and greenery they would like to see in front of the restored subway kiosk. Perhaps, a resident suggested, Forest City Ratner might be persuaded to contribute the funds.’Does Ratner want to prove he cares?’ someone asked. ‘I haven’t asked him,’ Markowitz replied testily …”
“…The car looped west and turned up Pacific Street, into the footprint of the proposed arena. ‘Just take a look at what’s coming down,’ Markowitz said. ‘I want you to look at this and tell me in any manner, shape, or form that this has historical significance.’ On the block where we were, there were a few warehouses and row houses looking shabby and forlorn … ‘You can see this is gorgeous—just a beautiful, beautiful sight,’ Markowitz said, with undisguised sarcasm.”
“…Markowitz said, ‘When you take a look and you close your eyes you can envision beautiful housing, and retail, and some commercial space, and an arena, and activity, and people here, and people excited about living here. . . . ‘ He trailed off into urban reverie. … ‘The developers, unlike me, are not in the business of being public servants or social workers or do-gooders,’ he said. ‘I hate to say it, but they are businesspeople, and they should be businesspeople.'”
hmmmm. why no DHeights commentary?
I read the whole damn thing and picked out the best parts for you. Now you want commentary? 🙂
You could interpret my selection of quotes as my commentary or bias. It’s been done before…
gotcha.
here is my letter to the N. Yorker editors:
Dear Editors:
Rebecca Mead’s profile of Brooklyn’s Borough President, Marty Markowitz, will probably be celebrated over at Borough Hall as a full disclosure of the nostalgia-dripping, good-guy caricature Marty loves to project. They ought stop celebrating, though. Marty, as he prefers to be called, portrays my community, neighborhood and my block, as a place of scorn and disdain. Dismissing the area, in order to support Bruce Ratner’s false claims of blight, shows utter contempt for his constituents. Furthermore, he is just plain wrong. While driving down Pacific Street in his gas guzzling, chauffeured SUV, Marty refers to the buildings along the block, and states, with derision and inaccuracy, “I want you to look at this and tell me in any manner, shape, or form that this has historical significance.” The Borough President should know that there are at least 4 architecturally and historically significant buildings slated for demolition if the Ratner proposal is approved. Never mind the historical and contemporary significance of the lives lived for decades in most of the 53 buildings that would be condemned and demolished, thus destroying one of the city’s most ethnically diverse and best mixed-use communities. Such is the cavalier attitude of a supposed “man of the people” who cares more for the hokum of a baseball team that left decades ago than he does for the people who have made Brooklyn ripe for the taking of well-connected developers like his good friend, Bruce Ratner.
a slobbering schnorring pig like markowitz to make aesthetic
judgements is laughable…
Interesting article. Personally, I like Marty. He may be unpopular in certain areas of gentrified Brooklyn, but the rest of the borough likes him and will surely re-elect him.
Thats funny, the area he calls blighted hates him, you say its gentrified. very odd. of course Marty will win. he’s got a million bucks and no Democratic challenger. who the hell would want to hold his figurehead post.
“slobbering schnorring pig”, that i like!
How about the bit about his two drivers. One earned $74,000 last year. For driving. What’s a Brooklyn teacher earn? $33,000? Sheesh.
The gentrified areas to which I was referring are not limited to the areas where Ratner wants to build the stadium, office towers, and housing. I was referring to other neighborhoods, as well, like Park Slope.
I don’t find old, dilapidated buildings to be of “historical significance” any more than I would a moldy cheese sandwich. It’s time to stop clinging to the artifacts of yesterday and to start creating the kind of place that will make our neighborhood a safer, cleaner, and more hospitable place to live in. Old buildings are great, but not when they crumble, are covered in grafitti, are ecologically unfriendly (lead paint, asbestos, leaky windows, porous roofs) and are the color of dirt. I live here. I am PROUD of the neighborhood, especially the PEOPLE. I hate the crime and the grime. The changes that are coming are BIG and at times scary, but they will make ProHo a much better place for my daughter to grow up in and raise her family one day.
Brokelyn:
did you read this:
“Never mind the historical and contemporary significance of the lives lived for decades in most of the 53 buildings that would be condemned and demolished, thus destroying one of the city’s most ethnically diverse and best mixed-use communities.”
as for crumbling etc buildsings, the 4 of historical and architectural significance are neither “dilapitated” nor “crumbling” as a matter of fact, one is the only one of its kind in the entire city.
for the last time, we can get everything that some find positive about the Ratner plan w/o destroying one existing building. but instead, its what Bruce wants for his bottom line, Bruce gets.
I take pride in my home and my neighborhood. Not every one of my neighbors feels the same way, judging by the appearance of their buildings and yards. This might not be politically correct, but I am not going to shed a tear if some of those residents get displaced. They are the ones who allowed parts of the neighborhood to fade. Living here for four decades doesn’t mean one has the right to allow their place to look like it did in the mid-60’s.
I like the ethnic and demographic mix, but don’t be fooled into believing that it is THAT “diverse.” Not by a long shot. ProHo is as segregated as much of the rest of NY, but in its own special way. Park Slope, perhaps, has the most diverse population living side-by-side (black, white, asian, caribbean, gay, straight, artist, executive, etc.), but ProHo isn’t the kind of place (yet) that a gay black man or young white female can stroll through without negative comment.
This focus on Ratner and his bottom line is off-base. He’s a businessman and he wants to make money. Without that profit motive, there is no incentive to build housing, open shops, etc. Do you begrudge the fine folks at Half every time you overpay for a drink? Heck no! They are just as “greedy” as Ratner, just on a smaller scale. The alternate proposals for the area are nice, but many of them do not create lasting value for the neighborhood AND for investors. BOTH have to be appeased for this to succeed.
Are the fine folks at Soda or anywhere else getting 2 billion in taxpayer subsidies? when they do, i’ll complain. How much profit for Ratner is reasonable? how much should be made off our backs and tax dollars? http://www.dddb.net/dummies
as for property owners letting their properties go to seed, as you say, please be specific.
the biggest offender, i’d say is the MTA and the City, look at how they keep Pacific between fifth and Vanderbilt.
in addition, the reason some properties are not further developed is that the goddamn city plays favorites with rezoning and have not granted rezoning to residential to some of these owners. yet they and the state are now ready to give Ratner whateer zoning he says he wants.
i agree that the vast subsidies make ratner a qualitatively different sort of businessman than the other local businesses interested in maxmizing profits.
as i feared, the name ProHo is apparently now being used without irony.
also, the alternative plan, the UNITY plan DOES create lasting value for the neighborhood and for investors. maybe not as much profit as Ratner expects to make, but when the public is paying so much, why should the developer get to maximize profits instead of makeing simply a reasonable profit?
I must admit I don’t care about buildings of “historical significance”. I actually prefer sleek, modern buildings personally so I won’t be crying when some of the old warehouses (like the Underberg building) get torn down.
right. history, who give a hoot.
again, I’m not talking about the Underberg building, i’m talking about architecturally and historically signficant buildings which have been or should be re-used, not knocked down. but no, for Ratner and his cronies 11 acres is not enough, they need 24.
Ratnerville: out of curiostiy, when does a “resonable” profit become an “unreasonable” profit? Care to give a dollar amount?
Regarding the UNITY plan, how many developers has it attracted?
yes. when the corporation profitting is using 2 billion in subsidies and their profit is way beyond that 2 billion. i think that is unreasonable and certainly unreasonable when those 2 billion in public dollars have no transparency or accountabality or political or public input over their expenditure.
when public money is used a developer’s profit is secondary. not saying the developer shouldn’t profit, but its not the priority of public dollars to profit a private entity. that profit is only a part of the equation.
Having been a small-business owner in New York City, I know that small businesses receive not one penny of tax break or subsidy from the city or state. Yet we are all willing to start and grow our businesses here, despite having to pay more taxes than anywhere else in the country. Why? Because businesses can succeed through hard work, perseverance and fair play. So why can’t developers build without huge breaks and subsidies, in the most lucrative real estate market in the country? Because they don’t have to. A few campaign donations assures that the playing field remains tilted permanently in their direction.
Take a southerly walk down Fifth Avenue from Flatbush Avenue sometime. It’s an incredibly thriving, creative, diverse area that has grown organically without a dime of subsidies. And it was considered a wasteland just a few years ago. Do you think it would be so desirable today if it had been paved over in favor of Target and Chuck E. Cheese?
oasis’ post made me think of how awesome it would be were the Atlantic yards filled with independant businesses. And then I started hating the stadium. Now I’m in a bad mood, thanks.
the UNITY plan would provide for small, local, independent businesses, Ratner’s plan would provide big box size spaces.
just a few tidbits about the architectural and historical importance of the “blight” that schmuck markowitz knows nothing about:
636 Pacific (Atlantic Arts Building) George S. Kingsley designed this former storage facility in a grand way creating a facade of glazed enamel ornamentation. The factory that created these three dimensional masterpieces was Faience, the same that did much of the landmarked nyc subway system. In fact, Kingsley’s buildings in Penn. and Chicago are national landmarks! Here, schmuck markowitz will just allow it to be torn down.
Ward Baking Co. Building. Built in 1911, it was the first automated bakery in nyc, supplying millions of loaves per week.
It’s white glazed tiled facade is a unique example for a building with industrial usage. The architects were inspired by structures in Europe to recreate a classical grandeur. Here, schmuck markowitz will just allow it to be torn down.
Spalding Building. One of the first buildings for the now famous makers of baseballs. At one point,1905, it employed over two thousand people and was the industrial hub of Prospect Heights. Fairly important historically, I would say, but schmuck
markowitz would tear it down.
All of these building represent an important part of this neighborhood. Not all buildings that deserve to be saved are residential! These structures represent the growth of Brooklyn
and are the true beginnings of a neighborhood.
It’s pathetic that the lowest common denominator becomes a borough president. It’s even more pathetic when someone with zero taste and knowledge has the gall to pronounce aesthetic judgements which ultimately will affect us and future generations.
anonymous, above, please identify yourself some way. you are RIGHT ON TARGET. and don’t forget that Freddy’s is pre-prohibition bar AND as far as social significance, Freddy’s is not your average bar, it is a home and community center for many brooklynites and is the only area bar I know of that has free events, music and otherwise, every night of the week. Dare I say Freddy’s is a cultural center. Yes, I dare and do. But what the hell does schmuck markowitz care about that. to use your refrain.
Marty just wants to have his basketball arena and anything else, well its just blighted and insignificant.
I propose we ask the State to condemn his home and borough hall, so we can build a starbucks on top of them and bring more revenue to the city. I mean what a waste of space those to buildings are.
I must disagree that Freddie’s bar is worth saving. As a black woman, I must say that I have found the place to be dirty, unfriendly and filled with cliques. The prices charged for basic beers like Budweiser and Brooklyn Lager are OUTRAGEOUS for such a downscale place. I have heard many people say that they view Freddie’s as a “community or cultural center”. Well I guess it’s simply a “community” that I’m not a part of and I’ve never seen any performances there that are reflective of my culture in any way. When I want a friendly neighborhood tavern, I go to Waterfront Ale House on Atlantic Avenue or 773 Lounge on Coney Island Avenue. So, I for one, will not be sad to see Freddie’s gone.
that’s really great… tear down a historic place because it has cliques and 5 dollar beers. whether you’re black or white, a clique excludes some people. on the other hand, most people i know, find Freddy’s outright friendly. perhaps, you should look inside esp. since you’re so quick to blame it on racial stereotypes….
“Whether you’re black or white, a clique excludes some people”
So, basically, you’re saying that DeeDee is correct. I must say, in all the times that I’ve been to Freddy’s over the years, I’ve seen very few black patrons and absolutely no black employees. This in a neighborhood with a strong African-American presence. Regarding the art and music, I have to say I wouldn’t miss it all that much. I really tried to like it, but just couldn’t manage to. The bands were pitiful, especially the guy croaking the worst rendition of “Big River” I’ve ever heard. A film fest I attended a few years ago was even worse. Most of them looked like something any 12-year old could produce. That aside, I could have sworn that I read that the Atlantic Yards project had been reworked to spare Freddy’s. Does anyone else recall hearing this?
To Ratnerville: I noticed that you dodged both of my questions in your above post, so I’ll answer one of them myself: the UNITY plan has attracted no developers. Without a developer, how do you expect the plan to ever see the light of day?
Hey Jack,
she might be correct that cliques may exist. so what? does that justify tearing down a neighborhood institution? I’m white and there are lots of only black clientele bars in PH… OK, let’s tear them down also. I feel left out.. Are you crazy? What I said was that Dee Dee should deal with her feelings of racial inferiority and not blame it on the patrons or the owner of a bar. Tearing down a bar will NOT cure her tendency to blame others. I sense lots of anger and that is her stuff to deal with on a personal level.
I’m not Ratnerville, but I guess that the reason no other developers are willing to take on the Yards is that they would get shafted by the Bloomberg administration on any other projects they would want to do. The same thing happened on the west side with the MTA yards. You know better than to pose that question… It’s answer is as obvious as the greed of Ratner.
Freddy’s is firmly in the Ratner footprint, for Jack, who asked.
sorry you don’t like the art or music at Freddy’s. at least you are not saying that therefore it should be torn down.
anyway, Freddy’s is the most welcoming bar I’ve ever been to. And how about this, one of its long time denizens died last week. He is black. The bar was packed full with the memorial service and ceremony arranged by his brothers and sisters at Freddy’s. Packed. Something Brucey and Marty could never even begin to understand, for if they did, it would shake their worldview so much they’d be peeing their pants.
Saying that DeeDee has feelings of racial inferiority is a bit of a stretch. She seems to be saying that she does not feel welcome at Freddy’s due to its lack of racial diversity (aside from the ONE patron mentioned by Ratnerville). And if you reread her post, she does not say that Freddy’s deserves to be torn down, only that she will not miss it because it means nothing to her.
By the way, anonymous, you said that there are “lots” of “only black clientele bars” in PH. To which bars are you referring? All the ones I’ve been to have either been predominantly white (such as Soda or Freddy’s) or racially mixed (such as Mooney’s or Tavern on Dean).
Your comparison of Atlantic Yards to the West Side does not hold up. Alternate bids for the West Side, namely Cablevision, had backing and could have realistically gone through. The UNITY plan has no financial backers, and if Ratner’s plan were to ever fall through, the UNITY plan would never be realized anyway.
Ratnerville, your e-mail address isn’t working. What long-time denizen died? It wasn’t Lee, was it?
It was Lee.