Integrative lawyering: Navigating the political economy of urban redevelopment

California Law Review

Volumn 95, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 1999-2072

  Fostert, Sheila R ^a,b   Glick, Brian ^a,b  

^a Department of Law ^*

^b FORDHAM UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 39549118680     PISSN: 00081221     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (456)

1. See generally HOWARD GILLETTE, JR., CAMDEN AFTER THE FALL: DECLINE AND RENEWAL IN A POST-INDUSTRIAL CITY (2005) (chronicling the history of, and examining the cumulative effects of, urban decline in a classic post-industrial city);
2. ARNOLD R. HIRSCH, MAKING THE SECOND GHETTO: RACE AND HOUSING IN CHICAGO, 1940-1960 (1998) (chronicling the strategies used by Chicago's ethnic, political, and business interests in reaction to the great migration of southern blacks in the 1940s and describing how the violent reaction of an emergent "white" population combined with public policy to segregate the city);
3. DOUGLAS W. RAE, CITY: URBANISM AND ITS END (2003) (chronicling the rise and fall of New Haven, Connecticut, from its industrial heyday through its gradual and then precipitous decline, from the early 20th century to the present day);
4. ROBERT O. SELF, AMERICAN BABYLON: RACE AND THE STRUGGLE FOR POSTWAR OAKLAND (2003) (telling the story of the postwar rise and decline of cities through Oakland and its nearby suburbs by tracing both the history of civil rights and black power politics as well as the history of suburbanization and home-owner politics);
5. THOMAS J. SUGRUE, THE ORIGINS OF THE URBAN CRISIS: RACE AND INEQUALITY IN POSTWAR DETROIT (1996) (explaining how Detroit and many other once prosperous industrial cities have become the sites of persistent racialized poverty, brought about by changes in the urban economy and labor market and by racial and class segregation), As Gillette poignantly characterizes this history:
6. [T]he New Deal ties forged between disparate constituencies around entitlements to decent wages and a secure home came unraveled in the postwar years. Not only did the number of well-paying union jobs decline as industries migrated away from older urban areas, housing support to those in greatest need declined too, even as subsidies increased for those who already had significant resources to buy homes in preferred locations. Both policy elements assumed stark spatial dimensions. As jobs decentralized and as federally financed loans underwrote the rapid growth of the suburbs, what publicly assisted housing was available was directed at older cities, causing both controversy and, eventually, inadequate housing options for the African Americans and other minority populations whose mobility remained strictly limited by racial or economic discrimination.. .. Despite the promise that all Americans could become full participants in a post-World War II 'consumer republic,' . . . the distribution of benefits in a robust market economy was extremely uneven. For those who made it to the suburbs, housing value came to be considered the key to security, and any changes that threatened to undercut that investment had to be resisted, including economic and racial diversity..
7. GILLETTE, supra note 1, at 4-5.
8. See generally WILLIAM H. SIMON, THE COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MOVEMENT: LAW, BUSINESS, AND THE NEW SOCIAL POLICY (2001) (examining evolution of community economic development movement, including analysis of its operating premises and strategies);
9. Scott L. Cummings, Community Economic Development as Progressive Politics: Toward a Grassroots Movement for Economic Justice, 54 STAN. L. REV. 399 (2001) [hereinafter Cummings, Toward a Grassroots Movement].
10. See LUKE W. COLE & SHEILA R. FOSTER, FROM THE GROUND UP: ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AND THE RISE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT 19-33 (2001) (explaining that the environmental justice movement grew organically out of many local struggles and events and social movements, including the civil rights, anti-toxics, labor and environmental movements);
11. see also Scott L. Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering: Community Economic Development in the Figueroa Corridor, in CAUSE LAWYERS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS 302, 303 (Austin Sarat & Stuart A. Scheingold eds., 2006) [hereinafter Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering] (noting that CED "is not connected with broad-based social movements" but instead is "parochial, seeking to preserve community boundaries and increase community control of resources," and as such is not "designed to challenge the existing rules of the game").
12. Bobby Peek, Dir., Groundwork, Introduction at the Environmental Justice Forum: Speak Out! (Aug. 25, 2001), available at http://www.groundwork. org.za/Pamphlets/EJ%20Forum.htm (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
13. Rachel Godsil and James Freeman made this argument over a decade ago. See Rachel D. Godsil & James S. Freeman, Jobs, Trees, and Autonomy: The Convergence of the Environmenta Justice Movement and Community Economic Development, 5 MD. J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 25, 47(1994).
14. Environmental justice activists tend to have a social movement orientation employing direct action and seeking structural reforms as a way to alleviate many of the problems, including environmental degradation, that their communities endure. See COLE & FOSTER, supra note 3, at 33-34.
15. The emerging advocacy within the CED movement for "accountable development" also focuses on "more confrontational forms of collective action, flowing out of the traditions of community organizing and social movement activism." Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering supra note 3, at 303 (contrasting this recent focus with the traditional CED strategy of building "partnerships and distributing] resources within the framework of the law as constituted" and fostering "a version of mobilization that tends to de-emphasize adversarial organizing in favor of collaboration with business and governmental partners.");
16. see also id. at 313 (stating that the emergence of an "accountable development" strand within CED practice has "sought to change city redevelopment practices through more confrontational grassroots campaigns aimed at increasing community participation in the planning process and forcing local developers and government officials to commit to redevelopment projects that are responsible to the needs of lowincome residents").
17. See Luke W. Cole, Empowerment as the Key to Environmental Protection: The Need for Environmental Poverty Law, 19 ECOLOGY L.Q. 619 (1992) [hereinafter Cole, Empowerment as the Key];
18. see also Luke W. Cole, Community Initiatives: Macho Law Brains, Public Citizens, and Grassroots Activists: Three Models of Environmental Advocacy, 14 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 687 (1995) [hereinafter Cole, Macho Law Brains].
19. JULIAN AGYEMAN, SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AND THE CHALLENGE OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 79-106 (2005).
20. See, e.g., id. (borrowing the intragenerational justice and equity focus from environmental justice activism and the ecological planning aspects from sustainability development; the "just sustainability" model is exemplified by the work of organizations that proactively attend to constructing, advocating, and securing larger policy shifts and actions to (re)build their communities into ones that are both socially just and ecologically sustainable);
21. see also Eric E. Yamamoto, Critical Race Praxis: Race Theory and Political Lawyering Practice in Post-Civil Rights America, 95 MICH. L. REV. 821, 829-30 (1997) ("Critical race praxis combines critical, pragmatic, socio-legal analysis with political lawyering and community organizing to practice justice by and for racialized communities. Its central idea is that racial justice requires antisubordination practice. In addition to ideas and ideals, justice is something experienced through practice").
22. See Julian Agyeman & Briony Angus, The Role of Civic Environmentalism in the Pursuit of Sustainable Communities, 46 J. ENVTL. POL'Y & MGMT. 345, 345 (2003).
23. AGYEMAN, supra note 8, at 141 (quoting Bill Shutkin's description of Alternatives for Community and Environment's "theory of change" as an example of an articulation of just sustainability).
24. See, e.g., Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 309.
25. See id.
26. See West Harlem Environmental Action (WE ACT) for Environmental Justice, http://www.weact.org (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
27. By community efficacy, we mean the capacity and ability of those who have the least voice in the development process to develop and implement a shared vision of its future.
28. See Charles V. Bagli, Columbia Buys Sites and Assures Neighbors, N.Y. TIMES, Apr. 21, 2004, at B8 [hereinafter Bagli, Columbia Buys Sites];
29. Charles V. Bagli, Columbia, in a Growth Spurt, Is Buying a Swath of Harlem, N.Y. TIMES, July 30, 2003, at Al [hereinafter Bagli, Columbia in a Growth Spurt].
30. See Bagli, Columbia in a Growth Spurt, supra note 16.
31. See N.Y. CITY DEP'T OF CITY PLANNING., MANHATTANVILLE IN WEST HARLEM REZONING AND ACADEMIC MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Ch. 1 at 42 (2007) [hereinafter COLUMBIA DRAFT EIS], available at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/ env_review/manhattanville.shtml (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (stating that Subdistrict A of the planned campus would include classrooms, scientific research facilities including laboratories, housing for graduate students, faculty, and other employees, recreational facilities including a swimming and diving center and related support space);
32. David J. Craig, Smart Growth, COLUM. MAG., June 2006, 8 at 12, available at http://www.neighbors.columbia.edu/pages/ manplanning/pdf-files/columbia_magjune06.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (stating that the underground facility would contain pools, parking, and maintenance facilities);
33. Columbia's Move on West Harlem, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 26, 2006, § 14, at 11 (reporting that the new campus would include the business school as well as new science labs and an art and culture center);
34. Douglas Feiden, Columbia Launches Land-Grab Plan: Many in West Harlem Would Be Booted from their Homes, N.Y. DAILY NEWS, Feb. 25, 2007, at 20 (reporting that the new campus would include dormitories as well as, potentially, a pool and even a hotel).
35. Columbia expects the project to take 25-30 years and cost at least $7 billion. See Daphne Eviatar, The Way We Live Now: 5-21-06: Dispute; The Manhattanville Project, N.Y. TIMES, May 21, 2006, § 6 (Mag.), at 632.
36. The first phase of the project initially was to incorporate the School of the Arts and some research space on Broadway itself. Bagli, Columbia in a Growth Spurt, supra note 16.
37. The plans remain preliminary. See Eviatar, supra note 18. The Greene Science Center and the magnet school, however, are scheduled for the first phase. See Craig, supra note 18.
38. By Columbia's calculations, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton each have more than double the square feet of space per student, according to planning documents. Jarrett Murphy, History Lesson, THE VILLAGE VOICE (N.Y.), May 24, 2006, at 14;
39. see also Craig, supra note 18, at 10 (stating that "[a]mong the Ivies, CU has the fewest square feet per student, with just half that of its most space-constrained peer, Harvard"). Its rivals' science research labs and performing arts venues, and their housing, gym and other facilities, are ever more lavish and up-to date.
40. See Bagli, Columbia in a Growth Spurt, supra note 16.
41. See Bagli, Columbia Buys Sites, supra note 16;
42. see also Craig, supra note 18, at 10 (noting a general trend towards campus construction in the last decade).
43. See, e.g., Marcella Bombardieri, Berklee Seeks to Build Dorm Tower and Theater, THE BOSTON GLOBE, Dec. 5, 2006, at Al (discussing the Harvard expansion into Allsten);
44. Steven Litt, Ronayne's at Square One with Circle, CLEV. PLAIN DEALER, Dec. 27, 2005, at E1 (discussing the Penn expansion and the acclaim that the university received for that expansion).
45. The students protested both the gym and the University's complicity in army research for the War on Vietnam. They were eventually removed when the university administration called in the New York City police. See Eviatar, supra note 18. Media around the world featured photos of students beaten and bloodied in the process. Students and their faculty supporters responded with a strike that shut down the university for the rest of the semester, and a new president was soon selected to run the university.
46. See generally JERRY L. AVORN, UP AGAINST THE IVY WALL: A HISTORY OF THE COLUMBIA CRISIS (Robert Friedman ed., 1968) (providing a detailed account of the 1968 uprising and the resulting violence based on the first-hand experiences of students, faculty, administrators, local government representatives and members of the Harlem community).
47. See also Eviatar, supra note 18 ("[T]he standoff ended in bloodshed: police stormed the buildings, beating and arresting students. Nearly 200 were injured.");
48. John Giuffo, Big Plan on Campus, THE VILLAGE VOICE (N.Y.), Aug. 6, 2003, at 62 (describing the violence of the police reaction and the paralysis of the university at the time).
49. See Timothy Williams, Land Dispute Pits Columbia vs. Residents in West Harlem, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 20, 2006, at B1 (noting that the area has been dominated by industrial uses since the Industrial Revolution).
50. One hundred forty apartments is the figure used by expansion opponents. See www.StopColumbia.org. (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). Columbia claims it will directly eliminate only one hundred thirty two residential units.
51. See COLUMBIA DRAFT EIS at 37.
52. The small businesses were estimated to have about 1200 employees. See, e.g., Bob Roberts, Open University, CITY LIMITS, Dec. 2004, at 15, 16 available at www.citylimits.org/content/articles/ viewarticle.cfm?article_id=3218 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
53. Except that in New York, charitable nonprofit corporations pay neither real property tax nor the "payments in lieu of taxes" required by many jurisdictions. See N.Y. REAL PROP. LAW §§ 420-a to 420-b (McKinney 2003).
54. See Danielle Wolffe, Planning Ahead for Columbia Expansion, REAL EST. WKLY., Nov. 22, 2006, at 23 (describing those involved in the project);
55. Renzo Piano Building Workshop and Skidmore, Ownings, & Merrill, Columbia University Expansion, ARCHITECTURE MAG., Sept. 12, 2004, at 46 (describing the architectural plan for the campus).
56. The law firm of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel represented Columbia in its environmental review process and its eminent domain application. See Kramer Levin, Environmental, http://www.kramerlevin.com/ environmental(last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
57. Griffith had served as the executive director of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission and secretary for strategic planning in that agency. Maxine Griffith Named Vice President for Government and Community Affairs, COLUM. NEWS, July 13, 2005, available at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/05/07/maxineGriffith.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
58. Before that, she served at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development during the Clinton administration, initially as the regional representative for New York and New Jersey and later as HUD's assistant Deputy Secretary. Id.
59. She also taught city planning and urban design at the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia, and New York University. Id.
60. Griffith outsourced community outreach to a consulting firm headed by Bill Lynch, Deputy Mayor and chief of staff for the same Black former mayor. The ex-mayor himself, David Dinkins, taught at Columbia and authored a New York Times op-ed in support of the University's proposed expansion. David N. Dinkins, Don't Fear Columbia, N.Y. Times, May 27, 2007, §A, Editorial Page, available at http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res= F40D17FF3C540C748EDDAC0894DF404 482# (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
61. See, e.g., Lois Weiss, Reach for the Skies-Harlem's New Development is at Fever Pitch, N.Y. POST, Aug. 4, 2004, at 50 (discussing the positive impact of Columbia's purchase of land in Manhattanville on the "otherwise dingy area");
62. see also Columbia's Move on West Harlem, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 26, 2006, § 14, at 11.
63. Coalition to Preserve Community, http://www.stopcolumbia.org (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) [hereinafter StopColumbia].
64. See Michael Specter, Harlem Groups File Suit to Fight Sewage Odors, N.Y. TIMES, June 22, 1992, at B3;
65. WE ACT, WE ACT History, http://www.WEACT.org/history.html [hereinafter WE ACT History] (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
66. See Erin M. Crotty, Comm'r, N.Y. Dep't of Envtl. Conservation, Commissioner Policy 29: Environmental Justice and Permitting, (Mar. 19, 2003), http://www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/36951.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
67. see also WE ACT History, supra note 30 (discussing the successful effort to draft New York City's Local Law 1 of 2004, a lead poisoning prevention bill).
68. th St., Broadway to the River, W. HARLEM PLAN UPDATE (N.Y. City Econ. Dev. Corp.), Summer 2002, http://neighbors.columbia.edu/pages/manplanning/pdf-files/ Harlem_Piers.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
69. WE ACT, Harlem on the River Planning Document, Nov. 8, 2000, http://www.WEACT.org/hotr/downloads/HOTRPlanningDocument.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) [hereinafter WE ACT, Harlem on the River];
70. WE ACT History, supra note 30.
71. WE ACT had been designated to develop and operate this center in a partnership with Columbia, which had to be deferred until the University expansion issues could be resolved.
72. See WE ACT, Harlem on the River, supra note 32.
73. See Columbia Draft EIS, supra note 18 at Ch. 22 at 13 available at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/env_review/manhattanville/22.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
74. Letter from Coalition to Preserve Community Steering Committee to New York Department of City Planning (Jan. 2, 2006) [hereinafter Coalition Response] (on file with author) available at http://www.stopcolumbia.org/content/ view/34/64/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
75. West Harlem Environmental Action (WE ACT) for Environmental Justice, Official Written Comments on Columbia's Proposed Manhattanville in West Harlem Zoning and Academic Mixed-Use Development Environmental Impact Statement Draft Scope of Work (Jan. 6, 2006), http://www.WEACT.org/columbia/ Official_Written_Comments-06JAN06.pdf, at 65 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) [hereinafter WE ACT, Official Written Comments], (stating that the expansion "will deter pedestrian use of the area because of the noise, odors, and dust that will be ever-present");
76. see also id. at 67-68 (discussing the air quality problems that construction will cause and citing studies about existing asthma rates in this part of the city and potential asthma-causing emissions that construction would entail).
77. See Columbia Draft EIS, supra note 18 at Ch. 22 at 9-11 available at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/env_review/manhattanville/22.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
78. Coalition Response, supra note 34;
79. WE ACT, Official Written Comments, supra note 24 at 47-49.
80. See Columbia Draft EIS, supra note 18 at Ch. 22 at 23-32 available at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/env_review/manhattanville/22.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
81. Eviatar, supra note 18 (discussing the fact that Columbia has obtained security clearance to experiment with highly dangerous substances, though the university claims that it has no intention of using those substances in on-campus research);
82. Murphy, supra note 19 (discussing the types of viruses that may be involved in the Columbia labs that would be placed in West Harlem). The National Institutes of Health set these biosafety levels (BSLs) in order to both promote necessary medical research and to ensure that those laboratories conducting such research have adequate safety and security requirements.
83. See The Need for Biosafety Laboratory Facilities, NAT'L INSTS. OF HEALTH, May 2006, http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ factsheets/facilityconstruct_06.htm (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
84. BSL-1 agents are "not generally associated with disease in healthy people" and require only minimal security measures. Id. BSL-2 agents are "associated with human disease" and require that lab access be limited, that biohazard warning signs be placed, and that other precautions be taken with work space, waste disposal, lab protection, physical containment devices, etc.
85. Id. BSL-3 agents are "associated with human disease and cause illness by spreading through the air;" additionally, they "[c]ause diseases that may have serious or lethal consequences."
86. Id. They require controlled access, decontamination of waste and clothing, physical containment devices, protective clothing, respiratory protection, and certain technological features like air circulators.
87. See id. BSL-4 agents "[a]re associated with human disease and cause illness by spreading through the air . . . or have an unknown cause of transmission;" they also "[c]ause diseases that are usually life-threatening."
88. Id. Laboratories that do research with these substances must have even more stringent safety procedures, like decontamination of all material, changing of clothing and showering upon leaving the laboratory, and technological safety measures like protective personnel suits and vacuum and decontamination systems.
89. See id. In addition to the construction of the labs, Columbia planned to dig a seven-story underground factory - for deliveries, parking, heating and cooling, waste processing, storage, pool and gym -dangerously close to an earthquake fault line.
90. See Eviatar, supra note 18. Some of Columbia's planned buildings would be as high as twenty stories, blocking light and waterfront views from public housing projects to the East.
91. See id. Heating, air conditioning, waste disposal and other engineering features could exacerbate pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental harms, or could minimize them through "green" design and construction.
92. See WE ACT, Official Written Comments, supra note 24, at 60-61.
93. See sources at note 24, supra;
94. Erin Durkin, Relocation Discussions: Residents Allege HPD Secrecy, Privacy Violations, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, Mar. 2, 2006 [hereinafter Durkin, Relocation Discussions];
95. StopColumbia, supra note 29.
96. Interview with Donald Notice, Executive Director, West Harlem Group Assistance, a community-based nonprofit organization which owns the buildings, New York, New York, April 10, 2007.
97. See http://www.hcci.org/RED/new.shtml (last visited Oct. 3, 2007), website of Harlem Congregations for Community Involvement, the community-based nonprofit organization which owns and operates the housing in a joint venture with Neighborhood Artists.
98. See note 128 infra and accompanying text.
99. See Durkin, Relocation Discussions, supra note 37;
100. StopColumbia, supra note 29.
101. Id.
102. See Robin Pogrebin, A Man About Town, In Glass and Steel, N.Y. TIMES, Jan. 5, 2005, at El;
103. David Usborne, Welcome to Harlem, NYC; Ten Years Ago It Was the No-Hope Ghetto-Now Everybody Wants a Piece of It, THE INDEP. (London), Feb. 13, 2000, at 1.
104. See also Julian Brash, Gentrification in Harlem? A Second Look (May 4, 2000) (unpublished M.S. thesis, Columbia University), available at http://eastharlempreservation.org/docs/brash.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (discussing existing gentrification in Harlem and changing opinions about it over time).
105. Secondary displacement involves housing that is lost as an indirect result of nearby development, most often through rising rent prices. WE ACT, Official Written Comments, supra note 24, at 82 ("An even more insidious effect of the expansion project is that it will spur a rash of land speculation and cause rent and housing prices in the area to skyrocket. This will result in a second and much more widespread wave of secondary displacement as current residents will be pushed more to the margins of the City because they can no longer afford their present home").
106. Tanveer Ali, Harlem Building Ends Low Rent Program, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, Apr. 28, 2004. Though the owner denied that Columbia's expansion motivated its decision to opt out, the tenants and local housing activists, as well as WE ACT and its legal team, thought the timing speaks for itself.
107. See Deborah Brown, City Housing: Rising Rents, Federal Cuts, Local Innovation, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, May 9, 2005.
108. Tanveer Ali, 3333 Residents Still Wait Impatiently for Promised Rent Relief, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, Sept. 8, 2005;
109. see also N.Y. PRIV. HOUS. FIN. LAW § 11 (McKinney 2002). The Mitchell-Lama Housing Program is a New York State program created in 1955 with the goal of building affordable housing for middle-income people.
110. See Mitchell-Lama Housing Program, N.Y. DIV. OF HOUS. & CMTY. RENEWAL, http://www.dhcr.state.ny. us/ohm/progs/mitchlam/ohmprgmi.htm (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) [hereinafter Michell-Lama Program];
111. see also NY PRIV. HOUS. FIN. LAW § 11. There have been 269 Mitchell-Lama developments (over 105,000 housing units) built since the inception of the program, but a number of them have withdrawn from the program under a buyout program that permits owners to withdraw after twenty years on prepayment of the mortgage (note that it may be thirty-five years in cases of some older developments).
112. See Michell-Lama Program, supra. These housing developments are owned by private developers but supervised by city or state agencies.
113. See Judith A. Calogero, Comm'r, N.Y. DIV. OF HOUS. & CMTY. RENEWAL, Mitchell-Lama Buyout Program, Aug. 22, 2005, available at http://www.osc.state.ny.us/ audits/allaudits/093005/04s5.pdf, at 1 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
114. To encourage private parties to participate in the program, the state financed low-interest, long term mortgages that defrayed a number of the total development costs, and local governments granted property tax exemptions to encourage developers to participate. Id. Until the owners buy out, they must maintain affordable rent; if they buy out, they may raise rents as high as they would like.
115. See id. at 1-2. The decline in affordable housing is related to the decline of available Mitchell-Lama housing in the city. See William C. Thompson, Jr., Comptroller, City of N.Y., Affordable Housing Crisis is Accelerating, May 25, 2006, available at http://www.comptroller.nyc. gov/enews/jun06.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (discussing the decline in available Mitchell-Lama housing and making recommendations for the future of the project).
116. The Mitchell-Lama program has been in the news quite a bit lately, especially because one well-known Mitchell-Lama development, known as Starrett City, was almost sold. See, e.g., Alexandra Marks, With 'Affordable Housing' Buildings for Sale, Tenants Worry, THE CHRISTIAN SCI. MONITOR (Boston, Mass.), Mar. 5, 2007, at 1;
117. see also C.J. Hughes, Exit the Lawyers, Cue the Builders, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 19, 2006, § 11, at 8 (discussing the approval of a renewal project that took over a Mitchell-Lama housing development);
118. Janny Scott, In Governor's Race, Group Pushes to Make Lower-Priced Housing a State Issue, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 3, 2006, at B5 (discussing the New York City mayoral race and the discussions about affordable housing in that race, including Mitchell-Lama housing).
119. This dynamic was typical of the privately owned, publicly assisted affordable housing projects developed in the 1970s (in contrast to public housing built in the 1930s and 1940s, which remains publicly owned and operated). On the New York City implications, see Victor Bach, The Future of HUD-Subsidized Housing: The New York City Case, in HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN NEW YORK CITY: FACING THE FUTURE 143 (Michael H. Shill ed., 1999);
120. see also What Might Happen to Section 8 Properties Under the New Law?, HOUS. BULL. (Nat'l Hous. L. Project, Oak., Cal.), 28 HOUS. L. BULL. 17 (Feb. 1998), available at http://www.nhlp.org/httnl/hlb/298/298section8.htm (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
121. Rent stabilization governs only buildings fully occupied on or before January 1, 1974, but Riverside opened in 1976 and reached full occupancy in 1978. See In re KSLM-Columbus Apts, Inc. v. N.Y. Div. of Hous. & Cmty. Renewal, 835 N.E.2d 643 (N.Y. 2005).
122. United States Housing Act § 8(t) of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437f(t) (2006). Federal Section 8 Enhanced Vouchers are available for tenants in buildings which, like this one, received federal construction subsidies under section 236 of the National Housing Act of 1968, and have opted or bought out of subsidy-linked rent restrictions. See 12 U.S.C. § 1715z-1 (2006).
123. Tenants can be denied enhanced vouchers for earning too much, living in too large or small a unit, having a household member who was convicted of a violent crime, or failing to timely produce required paperwork. See § 1437f(t), supra note 48;
124. Housing Preservation: Enhanced Vouchers, NAT'L HOUS. L. PROJECT, available at http://www.nhlp.org/ html/pres/vouchers/index.cfm (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
125. Public and Indian Housing: Housing Choice Vouchers Fact Sheet, U.S. DEP'T OF HOUS. & URBAN DEV., available at http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/hcv/about/ fact_sheet.cfin#9 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
126. Residential Tenants: Section 8 Information, CITY OF N.Y. DEP'T OF HOUS. PRESERVATION & DEV., available at http://www.nyc.gov/htrnl/hpd/html/tenants/section_8. shtml#StickyVouchers (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (describing enhanced, or "sticky" vouchers).
127. This discussion is based on reports by project tenants and tenant leaders.
128. See supra note 24 and accompanying text.
129. See infra Part III.C;
130. see also Julian Gross, et al. Community Benefits Agreements: Making Development Projects Accountable, GOOD JOBS FIRST & THE CAL. P'SHIP FOR WORKING FAMS. (2005), available at http://www. goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/cba2005final.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
131. It has become "standard practice" in cities around the country "for developers of major projects to negotiate with neighborhood and other groups" to negotiate these CBAs. See Terry Pristin, Square Feet: In Major Projects, Agreeing Not to Disagree, N.Y. TIMES, June 14, 2006, at C6. These agreements are contracts that "almost always contain wage and hiring goals and may also include a grab bag of concessions, like a day care center, a new park, free tickets to sports events and cash outlays to be administered by the groups themselves."
132. Id.
133. See, e.g., Nona Liegeois & Malcolm Carson, Accountable Development: Maximizing Community Benefits from Publicly Supported Development, CLEARINGHOUSE REV. 174, 176 (JuIy-Aug. 2003), available at http://www.lafla.org/pdf/accountDevel.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
134. Id.; Gross, supra note 52.
135. See Gross, supra note 52 and accompanying text.
136. See Cummings, Toward a Grassroots Movement, supra note 2;
137. Gross, supra note 52, at 3.
138. See Gross, supra note 52, at 22-23;
139. Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 317 (discussing the importance of the unions coming together to present a united front in the Staples Center negotiations).
140. See infra note 165 (discussing the Bronx Terminal Market and Yankee Stadium projects).
141. Community groups that become developers have difficulty maintaining their activism since they come to depend on government and corporate financing, need to hire professional and technical staff rather than organizers and advocates, and often become alienated from local residents due to their roles as landlords, large-scale employers and creditors. They become players in, no longer oppose, and inadvertently lend legitimacy to, a political economy that subordinates and exploits community residents. See Randy Stoecker, The CDC Model of Urban Redevelopment: A Political Critique and an Alternative, 19 J. OF URBAN AFF. 1 (1997) (advocating separation of community organizing and planning from nonprofit housing and economic development);
142. see also Cummings, Toward a Grassroots Movement, supra note 2, at 453-54;
143. Daniel S. Shah, Lawyering for Empowerment: Community Development and Social Change, 6 CLINICAL L. REV. 217 (1999).
144. On DSNI, see PETER MEDOFF & HOLLY SKLAR, STREETS OF HOPE: THE FALL AND RISE OF AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 254-87 (1994);
145. Benjamin B. Quinones, Redevelopment Redefined: Revitalizing the Central City with Resident Control, 27 U. MICH. J.L. REFORM 689 (1994).
146. See, e.g., ROBERT A. DAHL, WHO GOVERNS? DEMOCRACY AND POWER IN AN AMERICAN CITY (1961) (describing the study of New Haven mid-century as a democratic success story).
147. See generally SPACES OF NEOLIBERALISM: URBAN RESTRUCTURING IN NORTH AMERICA AND WESTERN EUROPE (Neil Brenner & Nik Theodore eds., 2002) (examining the role of neoliberal political projects since the 1970s in shaping the dynamics of urban change in North America and Europe, including the reproduction and intensification of uneven spatial development within and between cities).
148. See, e.g., Audrey G. McFarlane, The New Inner City: Class Transformation, Concentrated Affluence and the Obligations of the Police Power, 8 U. PA. J. CONST. L. 1, 15-17 (2006).
149. See generally ROBERT A. CARO, THE POWER BROKER: ROBERT MOSES AND THE FALL OF NEW YORK (1974) (describing the rise and concentration of power to redevelop New York in the hands of Robert Moses);
150. RAE, supra note 1, at 316 (describing the work of Ed Logue, who ran New Haven's Redevelopment Agency during the Urban Renewal era and later headed New York State's Urban Development Corporation and Boston's redevelopment agency as "second only to Robert Moses' as a practitioner of urban transformation");
151. see also JOEL SCHWARTZ, THE NEW YORK APPROACH: ROBERT MOSES, URBAN LIBERALS AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE INNER CITY (1993).
152. For example, as Douglas W. Rae writes, in the context of New Haven urban renewal: The IRS collected cash from taxpayers across America, Congress placed it at the disposal of the Housing and Home Finance Agency (HHFA), and later the Urban Renewal Administration, and the Redevelopment Agency of New Haven competed with remarkable success for the resulting swag. The money came to that "local agency" under federal law, and not to the general fund of city government, which is to say it came to [Ed Logue, head of the city's Redevelopment Agency] and his Redevelopment colleagues. Their projects and plans required approval from the Board of Aldermen, and some cooperation from any number of city agencies, but the Redevelopment budgets were virtually autonomous from city politics. The Kremlin [redevelopment] was financed largely by people who were not entitled to vote in New Haven, mostly on a funding formula which granted two-thirds of net project costs in federal dollars and then allowed the local agency to count many in-kind items toward the local third. RAE, supra note 1, at 322.
153. PAUL KANTOR, THE DEPENDENT CITY REVISITED: THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL POLICY 147-48 (1995);
154. SCHWARTZ, supra note 64.
155. DAHL, supra note 61, at 214. Shifting political constellations of different interests, he argued, created an "executive-centered" coalition that governed the city during this era.
156. Id. at 214 ("The preferences of any group that could swing its weight at election time-teachers, citizens of the Hill, Negroes on Dixwell Avenue, or Notables-would weigh heavily in the calculations of the Mayor").
157. Dahl's views were contested at the time and remain contested. See, e.g., CHARLES BLATTBERG, FROM PLURALIST TO PATRIOTIC POLITICS: PUTTING PRACTICE FIRST ch. 5 (2000);
158. G. William Domhoff, Who Really Ruled in Dahl's New Haven?, Sept. 2005, available at http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/ new_haven.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
159. A retrospective look at New Haven and other central cities reveals clear winners and losers from the urban renewal era. Today, the New Haven metropolitan region, like many older urban regions, is prominently characterized by race and class inequalities that tend to reinforce one another. See RAE, supra note 1, at 420 (taking issue with Dahl's argument that political/interest inequalities in New Haven have come to offset rather than reinforce and concluding that "there are reasons to doubt or even reject his generalizations as the subject of inquiry switches to the region as a whole," particularly when one considers the clear disparities between New Haven and its surrounding, more affluent towns).
160. KANTOR, supra note 66, at 150.
161. Id. at 150-51 (noting that "[v]ast slum areas had been demolished, new commercial and residential opportunities on vacant downtown land were in place, and the process of social 'upgrading' in residential neighborhoods adjacent to renewal sites had begun").
162. As Paul Kantor has argued:
163. The economic dilemma facing most older central cities is no longer one of physical restructuring of their cores. It is one of inducing continued conversion of their economies at a time of shrinking tax bases, cuts in intergovernmental aid, and increasing competition from urban jurisdictions in suburbia. . . . In general, this has forced city governments to undertake more flexible, piecemeal strategies to induce capital investment in particular markets and businesses. Economic development policy mostly is one of selling the city by accommodating the demands of individual revenue-provider groups and businesses through varied public entrepreneurial techniques that provide incentives for them to invest in the locale. The "packaging" of more or less tailor-made business incentive programs is now the current development policy. . . . [T]hese packages can include tax abatements, loans, discounted land sales, new industrial parks, housing rehabilitation grants, and other forms of business subsidies. Kantor, supra note 66, at 151-52;
164. see also H.V. Savitch & Paul Kantor, Cities in the International Marketplace: The Political Economy of Urban Development in North America and Western Europe (2002) (arguing that local governments compete for private capital in the international marketplace and that they adopt policy strategies to influence the terms of their participation; the more bargaining advantages held by a city, the greater its ability to shape urban development).
165. See KANTOR, supra note 66, at 4-5 (arguing that "[a]lthough local political systems have become more open to community wishes, dependency on exterior economic forces increasingly has undermined [cities'] ability to act responsively on issues of economic and social development" and citing as an example that "New York City officials found it easier to give away millions to a wealthy corporation than to extend aid to the homeless");
166. see also Neil Smith, New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy, in SPACES OF NEOHBERALISM 8o, supra note 62, at 95-96 ("Whereas urban renewal of in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s sought a full-scale remaking of the centers of many cities and galvanized many sectors of the urban economy in the process, it was highly regulated and economically and geographically limited by the fact that it was wholly dependent on public financing and therefore had to address issues of broad social necessity, such as social housing. In contrast, the earliest wave of gentrification that followed urban renewal proceeded with considerable independence from the public sector. . . . What marks the latest phase of gentrification in many cities, therefore, is that a new amalgam of corporate and state powers and practices has been forged in a much more ambitious effort to gentrify the city than earlier ones").
167. New York City's elaborate and expensive effort to keep the Yankees in town, including the over $200 million in state and city grants and huge tax exemptions, is only a recent example of this phenomenon. See KANTOR, supra note 66, at 115-16 (citing the example of some cities' efforts to keep its sports stadiums and concluding that, although nearly all of the stadiums built since 1960 are publicly owned, the sports facilities that in fact are supposed to provide a source of revenue for cities are instead a taxpayer burden imposing heavy costs on cities);
168. see also Raymond J. Keating, Op-Ed., Don't Throw Our Money Down the Drain; The Politicians Say Stadiums Will Be Built with Private Funds, But the Public Will Still Get Soaked for Millions, NEWSDAY (N.Y.), June 17, 2005, at A51 (discussing the fact that taxpayers would cover over $200 million in infrastructure, and that an even higher amount would be given once the city took into account the tax-exempt bonds and lack of property taxes).
169. See, e.g., KANTOR, supra note 66, at 5 (arguing that "[t]he capability of city governments to democratically shape their economic and social development has seriously declined" as result of cities' dependence on the market dynamics of private sector);
170. RAE, supra note 1, at xviii (noting the shift away from democratic pluralism to "the end of urbanism" as entailing "the end of thinking about city government as a pivotal and more or less autonomous power system").
171. See infra note 102 and accompanying text. In particular, community boards in New York "represent the city's longest running effort to involve local communities directly in the government. People debate how successful the system of community boards has been, but through them, many neighborhoods have gained a voice in the decisions that affect them."
172. Seth Forman, Community Boards, GOTHAM GAZETTE N.Y. CITY NEWS & POL'Y (Sept. 20, 2000), available at http://www.gothamgazette.eom/article//20000920/202/150 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
173. At present, there are fifty-nine commumty boards throughout the city, which consist of unsalaried members who have some interest in the commumty. Id. Their responsibilities include: "1. Improving the delivery of city services; 2. Planning and reviewing land use in the community; 3. Making recommendations on the city's budget" and 4. Consulting on the "placement of most municipal facilities in the community."
174. Id.
175. See generally Alejandro Esteban Camacho, Mustering the Missing Voices: A Collaborative Model for Fostering Equality, Community Involvement, and Adaptive Planning in Land Use Decisions, 24 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 3, (2005) (discussing the reigning "bilateral, negotiated land use" model in which important local land use decisions are frequently made in closed-door negotiations that exclude many affected parties, further disenfranchising those with the least influence and fewest resources).
176. Id. at 14 (stating that "[z]oning regulations no longer serve as a fixed vision of the community's plan, but rather as a baseline rights allocation from which a locality and a developer bargain");
177. see also Juliana Maantay, Zoning Law, Health and Environmental Justice: What's the Connection?, 30 J.L. MED. & ETHICS 572, 582 (2002) (finding, based on the author's study of changes to zoning classifications over a 27-year period in New York City, that "[c]ity planning's role [is] basically seen as a support mechanism to facilitate private real estate initiatives for projects that the city or state could no longer afford to undertake" and that "[g]overnment's desire for private sector investment in the city seemed to override the need for conformance to the mandated comprehensive planning process, the desire to guide planning, or the need to put the community's desires on an at least equal footing with the private sector").
178. Liegeois & Carson, supra note 53, at 176.
179. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 315-17 (discussing the involvement of economic justice organizations, like Strategic Actions for a Just Economy (SAJE) and the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE), as well as community organizing groups, like Action for Grassroots Empowerment and Neighborhood Development Alternatives (AGENDA));
180. see also Action for Grassroots Empowerment and Neighborhood Development Alternatives, http://www.scopela.org/agenda/index.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
181. Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, http://www.laane.org/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
182. Strategic Actions for a Just Economy, http://wvAv.saje.net/site/c. likLQJcMUKrH/b.2315777/k.BF4B/Home.htm (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
183. Especially UNITE HERE, which hoped to represent long-term employees.
184. See UNITE HERE, http://unitehere.org (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
185. Particularly Environmental Defense and the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), especially in the Los Angeles airport CBA, which focused significantly on environmental benefits to mitigate the impacts of airport expansion. See Environmental Defense, http://secure.environmentaldefense. org/documents/4205_Solutions_0105.pdf (describing the organization's role in negotiating the Los Angeles airport CBA) (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
186. see also National Resources Defense Council, http://www.nrdc.org/ default.asp (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
187. This paragraph is based on Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3.
188. See Robin Shulman & Diane Cardwell, Campaigning for City Hall: The Campaign; Weiner Attacks City's Deal on Bronx Market, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 25, 2005, at B8. Much of this is based on discussion with Gavin Kearney, who represented community groups that were pushed out of the CBA negotiations, and on his "Analysis of Areas of Disagreement between Final CBA and CBA Task Force Positions" regarding the Bronx Terminal Market project. Telephone Interview with Gavin Kearney, Staff Attorney, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, in N. Y., N.Y. (Feb. 12, 2007). Memorandum from Gavin Kearney, Staff Attorney, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest (Feb. 2, 2006) (detailing the deficiencies of the Bronx Terminal Market CBA as compared with other CBAs around the country, specifically in the areas of living wage requirements, hiring and referral requirements and enforcement mechanisms) (on file with authors).
189. See Keating, supra note 73;
190. Kearney, supra note 83.
191. See Michael O'Keefe, Jump Ball: Brooklyn Groups Still Up in Air Over Ratner Proposal, N.Y. DAILY NEWS, NOV. 27, 2005, at 63.
192. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 317 (discussing the role of ACORN in the Staples Center CBA);
193. see also ACORN.org: Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, http://www.acorn.org (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
194. st Century, 22 GA. ST. U. L. REV. 895 (2006) (questioning whether universities, CDCs, and BIDs are more appropriate planners/developers than cities). Columbia's nonprofit status does, of course, have some effects.
195. See infra Part IV.B.l (describing Columbia as initially impervious to delay in development projects).
196. The University's properties are exempt from municipal real estate tax under general legislation that applies to all nonprofit organizations in New York. Unlike many other jurisdictions, New York does not require nonprofit owners to make Payments in Lieu of Taxes (known as "PILOTs"). See supra text accompanying note 25.
197. See, e.g., Matter of Jackson v. N.Y. State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 N.Y.2d 400, 417 (stating that in SEQRA and CEQR proceedings, the court "may review the record to determine if the agency identified the relevant areas of environmental concern, took a 'hard look' at them, and made a 'reasoned elaboration' of the basis for its determination").
198. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 325 (describing the approach that accountable development lawyers take to the use of litigation, stating that "FCCEJ's success in bringing the developer to the negotiating table, for example, was premised in large part on the threat that it could, in fact, successfully litigate the environmental claims").
199. See id. at 327-28 (describing the way in which this type of lawyering is redistributive in the sense that the commumty is able to extract far more concessions from the developer than it would otherwise be able to).
200. See infra notes 96-126 and accompanying text.
201. See infra Part IV.B.1-2 (discussing municipal and state processes).
202. The Mayor appoints the chair (who also directs the DCP) and six members. The five elected borough presidents each select one member, as does the elected city-wide "Public Advocate," a kind of ombudsperson. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 192(a) (2004).
203. See Adam Brodsky, Gotham Gets Grander, N.Y. POST, May 16, 2004, at 29 ("And now-because Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff fantasizes about hosting the Olympics and Mayor Mike needs a legacy-[New York] is headed for hyper-change with a dazzling array of giant new projects. If even a fraction get built, it'll be hard to recognize much of the city in 10 or 20 years.");
204. Jonathan Mahler, The Bloomberg Vista, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 10, 2006, § 6, at 66 ("[T]o continue to grow, the city was going to have to undergo a period of hyperactive development.");
205. Sam Roberts, Wave of Development, Cleared for Takeoff, N.Y TIMES, Jan. 1, 2007, at B3 (describing the mayor's plans to initiate growth and development in a number of fora, including subway expansions, the Atlantic Yards complex, and low-income housing, as having a "pro-growth, longrange theme") (quoting Robert D. Yaro, the president of the Regional Plan Association);
206. Brad Lander & Laura Wolf-Powers, Remaking New York City: Can Prosperity Be Shared and Sustainable?, PRATT INST. CTR. FOR CMTY. & ENVTL. DEV. (NOV. 2004), available at http://www.prattcenter.net/pubs/ remakingnyc.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
207. See Ken Auletta, The Fixer, THE NEW YORKER, Feb. 12, 2007, at 46 (describing President Bollinger as a client of the powerful public relations mogul, Howard Rubenstein, whose client roster includes the New York elite, including Governor Spitzer and Mayor Bloomberg);
208. Jim Rutenberg, Mayor Says Bid Was Worth a Shot, Even Long, N.Y. TIMES, July 7, 2005, at Al (describing Doctoroff and Bloomberg as "businessmen who had made millions-in Mr. Bloomberg's case, billions").
209. See Becky Aikman, Changing Patterns: New York's Shrinking Garment Industry Keeps Redesigning Itself, With an Increased Focus on High Fashion and New Fads, NEWSDAY (N.Y.), Aug. 17, 2003, at A29 (describing the decline of the garment manufacturing industry in New York, suggesting that Mayor Bloomberg has not made saving manufacturing a priority, and quoting Doctoroff as saying that the industry is changing and that "[t]here are global forces under way . . . that affect not only . . . manufacturing in New York, but the whole country") (internal quotation marks omitted);
210. Lander & Wolf-Powers, supra note 95.
211. See Mahler, supra note 95 ("By setting all of this development in motion, the mayor is seeking to sustain the city's growth-and thus ensure that there will be housing and jobs for those who don't work on Wall Street.");
212. Roberts, supra note 95.
213. See Mahler, supra note 95 (conceding that "[i]t's far more economical for [Bloomberg] to create affordable housing in the outer boroughs");
214. Lander & Wolf-Powers, supra note 95.
215. See Mahler, supra note 95 (asserting that the concentration of affordable housing in the boroughs "will no doubt accelerate Manhattan's evolution into an island of the wealthy").
216. Cf. James Traub, Bloomberg's City, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 2, 2005, § 6 (Magazine), at 21 (describing the mayor's effort to gain support in Harlem).
217. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 192(e) (2004) ("The city planning commission shall oversee implementation of laws that require environmental reviews of actions taken by the city. The commission shall establish by rule procedures for environmental reviews of proposed actions by the city where such reviews are required by law. Such rules shall include procedures for (1) selection of the city agency or agencies that will be responsible for determining whether an environmental impact statement is required in connection with a proposed action and for preparation and filing of any such statement required by law, (2) participation by the city in environmental reviews involving agencies other than city agencies, and (3) coordination of environmental review procedures with the land use review procedures set forth in this charter. The director of city planning and the commissioner of the department of environmental protection shall assign from the staffs of such departments an office of environmental coordination, which shall provide assistance to all city agencies in fulfilling their environmental review responsibilities").
218. Dalton Walker, Columbia Rules Out Evictions in Expansion Plan, N.Y. TIMES July 23, 2007 at B2 [hereinafter Walker, Columbia Rules Out Evictions].
219. Jackson had chaired the local school board and was co-founder and President of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, which won major increases in New York City's share of New York State school funding. See Gail Robinson, The Last Word in School Funding? THE GOTHAM GAZETTE N.Y. CITY NEWS & POL'Y (Nov. 27, 2006), available at, http://www.gothamgazette.eom/article//20061127/200/ 2044 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (detailing the litigation launched by the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, which sought to significantly increase funding for New York City schools).
220. See also The Campaign for Fiscal Equity, http://www.cfequity.org/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
221. See Charles V. Bagli, The Jets Miss a Deadline For a West Side Property, N.Y. TIMES, July 23, 2005, at B3 [hereinafter Bagli, The Jets Miss a Deadline] (discussing the proposed complex);
222. Mike Mclntire & Jim Rutenberg, After Stadium Bid Fails, a Disheartened Bloomberg Worries for City, N.Y. TIMES, June 8, 2005, at B6 (discussing the failure of the plan).
223. See infra notes 153-180 and accompanying text.
224. See McKinney Unconsolidated Laws § 6254 (2000);
225. see also 1997 N.Y. Op. Att'y Gen. 44 (1997) (stating that the Urban Development Corporation is doing business as the Empire State Development Corporation);
226. Empire State Development, http://www.empire.state.ny.us (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). The Empire State Development Corporation is the umbrella organization for the Urban Development Corporation, which is its biggest component and which handles mostly publicly oriented companies. See OFFICE OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER, DIVISION OF STATE SERVICES, REPORT 2005-S-6, Empire State Development Corporation Oversight of Subsidiary Operations, at 9-10 (2006), available at http://www.osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093006/05s6.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (outlining the histories of and relationship between the Urban Development Corporation and the Empire State Development Corporation)
227. See generally Empire State Development Corporation, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_State_Development_Corporation (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (detailing several of the Urban Development Corporation's major public redevelopment projects).
228. The Empire State Development Corporation was created by the Urban Development Corporation Act, passed initially in 1968, and amended in 1975. This Act states that the nine directors of the corporation are to be the superintendent of banks (appointed by the Governor) the chairman of the New York State science and technology foundation, and seven directors to be appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the state senate. The governor is to choose the chairman and two others, who serve at his pleasure, and the four remaining are to serve terms of four years each from their appointment (and these directors may be removed by the governor only for cause). The governor may also appoint a president of the corporation with the advice and consent of the state senate who shall serve at the pleasure of the governor, and he has the power to "appoint a business advisory council for urban development, to advise and make recommendations to the corporation with respect to development policies and programs and to encourage maximum participation in projects of the corporation by the private sector of the economy." McKinney Unconsolidated Laws § 6254 (2000). The members of this council serve at the pleasure of the governor. See id.
229. See Errol A. Cockfield, Jr., Spitzer Inauguration Pledging Reform, NEWSDAY (N.Y.), Jan. 2, 2007, at A3 (describing Governor Spitzer's background).
230. See Charles V. Bagli, Spitzer Signals Desire to Keep Starrett City Affordable to the Middle Class, N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 2, 2007, at Bl [hereinafter Bagli, Spitzer Signals Desire];
231. Christopher Grimes & David Wighton, The "People's Lawyer" Who Took on Big Business and Is Now Wooing the Voters, FIN. TIMES (London), Dec. 24, 2004, at 11 (discussing Spitzer's wranglings with big corporations and executives).
232. See Usborne, supra note 43, at 1 (discussing gentrification in Harlem, and quoting David Patterson, state senator from Harlem, as saying, "If Harlem retains its name but comes to resemble the old Upper West Side, then who will have benefited? . . . Not the traditional residents of Harlem or the poor, because they will have been driven out. We will have created a new Harlem that will be a place for Wall Street executives to live").
233. Section 51 of the New York Public Authorities Law requires PACB "approval of the financing and construction of any project proposed by . . . [the] New York state urban development corporation [the Empire State Development Corporation]." N.Y. PUB. AUTH. LAW § 51 (McKinney 2004). Columbia has indicated that it interprets Section 51 as requiring PACB approval for ESDC cooperation even though it seeks no state assistance in financing or construction of its expansion.
234. See Mike Mclntire & Him Rutenberg, After Stadium Bid Fails, A Disheartened Bloomberg Worries for City, N.Y. TIMES, June 8, 2005 at B6.
235. Though Sheldon Silver, the state assembly speaker who ultimately jettisoned the West Side Stadium project, never explicitly gave reasons for his opposition, the media and others engaged in speculation. Some of the reasons included: want of funds for his own district, accommodation of local Democratic elected officials who vociferously opposed the project, and opposition from State employee unions who wanted greater oversight in the selection of private contractors for public projects. See Brian McGuire, Hamilton's Lessons for Pataki, THE N.Y. SUN, July 11, 2005, at 9;
236. Mclntire & Rutenberg, supra note 113;
237. Henry J. Stern, Op-Ed., Governor Silver, THE N.Y. SUN, June 30, 2006, at 9 (attributing Mr. Silver's opposition to the stadium plan to the fact that the plan was strongly opposed by a constituent who owned Madison Square Garden and feared competition from the new stadium).
238. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197(c) (2004) (describing the role of the Manhattan Borough President in ULURP review).
239. See Ross K. Baker, A Bulls-Eye on Pelosi, L.A. TIMES, May 14, 2006, at M5.
240. Interview with Cecil Corbin-Mark, Director of Programs, WE ACT, who was present at the meeting, in N.Y., N.Y. (Aug. 4, 2006).
241. See infra note 186 and accompanying text (describing the composition of the LDC).
242. Community boards were established by the New York City Charter. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 2800 (2004). There were three stages to the commumty board structure in New York City. The first began in 1969 with the community school district system, which involved minority leaders successfully passing a law that established local school boards to be elected by parents.
243. See Forman, supra note 75. The city then moved on to the Office of Neighborhood Government plan in the early 1970s, only to replace that structure with the present community board system in 1977.
244. See id. One of the biggest changes that characterizes the modern community board structure is the institution of the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), which "mandate[s] a community board review and vote on all land use applications, including zoning actions, special permits, acquisition and disposition of city property, and urban renewal plans."
245. Id.
246. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 2800(a) (2004);
247. Amy Widman, Replacing Politics With Democracy: A Proposal for Community Planning in New York City and Beyond, 11 J.L. & POL'Y 135, 144 (2002).
248. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197-a (2004). This is known as a "197-a Plan," named after the city charter section that authorizes a commumty board to propose such a plan for adoption by the City Planning Commission and City Council as an advisory guideline for future development of the area. Community boards or others who propose any such plan "shall submit the plan together with a written recommendation to the city planning commission for determinations" after a public hearing.
249. Id. The City Planning Commission is then to determine whether it approves the plan and, if so, is to prepare the environmental analysis for the plan.
250. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197(b) (2004).
251. Whenever a plan is proposed that would affect a particular community board, the plan must be referred to those community boards, and then a public hearing is to be held. See id. § 197(c). The approval of the commumty boards, or lack thereof, does not actually regulate development-it is seen as a form of advisory opinion.
252. See Widman, supra note 120, at 144;
253. Forman, supra note 75.
254. District 10, to its East, is overwhelmingly African American and Afro-Caribbean, with long established political and community leadership. See N.Y. CITY DEP'T OF CITY PLANNING, District Profiles, http://nyc.gov/htrnl/dcp/pdf/lucds/mn10profile.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). District 7 to its South is home to a liberal white professional/managerial populace with its own leadership structures.
255. See Id. at http://nyc.gov/htrnl/dcp/pdf/lucds/mn7profile.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
256. In recent years, District 12 to the North has similarly consolidated as the center of the City's newly arrived and expanding Dominican community. See Id. at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/lucds/mn12profile.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). District 9 has evolved to contain each of these groups in roughly equal parts (though the rapidly increasing Dominican population is hard to measure given the lag in census data and the reluctance of those with questionable or non-existent immigration documents to make themselves known to federal census takers).
257. See Id. at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/lucds/mn9profile.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
258. A study by David Rogers finds that boards in wealthier and ethnically more homogenous districts tend to be more effective, more unified, and less factionalized. See Forman, supra note 75.
259. Dominicans have moved south from uptown to occupy most of the area due north of the expansion site, including many units of the formerly state subsidized Riverside Park Community Houses. See supra note 44 and accompanying text. They live mostly in rental units, many in buildings too small to be protected under New York's rent regulation laws.
260. See N.Y. COMP. CODES R. & REGS. tit. 9 § 2100.2(f) (2006). The other neighborhoods surrounding the expansion site are not at serious risk for secondary displacement. Due east and south east of the expansion site are federal low-income public housing projects which will remain.
261. See infra notes 170-172 and accompanying text. To the northeast and northwest are expensive homeowner brownstones and riverfront condos. To the south are housing and facilities largely owned by Columbia and other institutions;
262. for example, Union Theological Seminary, the Riverside Church, and The Jewish Theological Seminary. See Columbia Draft EIS, supra note 18 at Ch. 10 at 6 available at http://nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/env_review/ manhattanville/10.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
263. Under section 197-a of the New York City Charter, this plan would only be advisory. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197-a (2004).
264. See Community Board 9 197-a Plan, PRATT INST. CTR. FOR CMTY. & ENVTL. DEV. (June 17, 2005), available at http://www.prattcenter.net/cp-cb9-197a.php (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
265. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197-c (2004). The City Planning Commission has the power to "oversee implementation of laws that require environmental reviews of actions taken by the city."
266. Id. § 192(e). The Commission develops procedures for the selection of those agencies who will determine whether an environmental impact statement is necessary, for the participation by the city in the environmental reviews when agencies not the city are involved, and for the coordination of environmental review procedures with land use review procedures.
267. See id. The City Planning Commission, under § 197-c, is the agency with which applications under § 197 are filed, along with any recommendations or written information that is involved in the process.
268. See id. § 197-c(b). The CPC then must certify that applications are complete and ready to go through the review process.
269. See id. After the community boards and borough presidents make their recommendations, they must submit them to the CPC.
270. See id. § 197-c(f). The Commission may then approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove the application.
271. See id. § 197-c(h). The City Council and Mayor are empowered to make political decisions subject to no standards or review. If the City Council votes no, the proposal is rejected. If it votes yes and the Mayor vetoes, the Council can over-ride by a two-thirds majority.
272. See id. § 197-d.
273. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 192-e (2004); 62 R.C.N.Y. § 5-01 (2006) (describing the rules of procedure for City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR));
274. Cyane Gresham, Note, Improving Public Trust Protections of Municipal
275. Kathryn C. Plunkett, Comment, Local Environmental Impact Review: Integrating Land Use and Environmental Planning Through Local Environmental Impact Reviews, 20 PACE ENVTL. L. REV. 211, 224-225 (2002). Although CEQR mandates only disclosure and does not obligate the developer to take or withhold any action, this "scoping session" can range more broadly since the EIS must cover not only physical and public health but also socioeconomic effects of the project, and set forth plans for mitigating all identified impacts.
276. Id. at 225.
277. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197-c (2004).
278. The Planning Commission also takes testimony and comments on the draft EIS and may order the EIS revised or expanded. See id. § 197-c(h).
279. See id. (explaining how the CPC can approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove);
280. see id. § 197-d(c) (describing that the council can approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove);
281. see id. § 197-d (stating that the council can override Mayor's veto by 2/3 vote).
282. If CB9's plan were approved, the City Planning Commission and City Council would have only to "consider" that plan before approving the University's plan under ULURP. See N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER § 197-a (2004) (referring to a plan initiated by a community board as a "recommendation");
283. Forman, supra note 75 (noting that community board plans under § 197-a are only "advisory statements," though city agencies are obligated to consider them in their decision-making process). Columbia also agreed, in a largely symbolic gesture, to include in its EIS a comparison of the environmental impacts of the two plans.
284. Josh Hirschland, Protestors Decry Timing of Environmental Impact Statement, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, June 1, 2007.
285. See N.Y. CITY DEP'T OF CITY PLANNING, Environmental Review, http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/ env_review/env_review.shtml (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (describing the CEQR process and detailing timelines for public comment).
286. Id.
287. See WE ACT, Official Written Comments, supra note 24.
288. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 318.
289. See MAYOR'S OFFICE OF OPERATION, OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION, CEQR Technical Manual Appendix A § 617.11(a) (on file with authors) available at http://www.nyc.gov/html/oec/html/ceqr/ceqrpub.shtml (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (stating that the Final EIS must be issued with a Statement of Findings and available for consideration and comment for at least 10 days before CPC can make its ULURP decision);
290. N.Y. CITY DEP'T OF CITY PLANNING, Land Use Review Procedure, http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/luproc/ulpro. shtml#cpcr (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (stating that CPC must approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the ULURP application within 60 days of the expiration of the Borough President's review period);
291. This means litigation may not be ripe until the CPC is nearly ready to approve the plan and send it to the City Council for review. The New York Supreme Court has held that one may not challenge a draft EIS and must wait until the final EIS has been promulgated. See Hell's Kitchen Neighborhood Planning Ass 'n v. N. Y. City Dep 't of City Planning, 800 N.Y.S.2d 347 (Sup. Ct. 2004) (holding that plaintiffs may not stay the administrative approval process by proving inadequacy of a draft EIS because the suit is not ripe and barred by a failure to exhaust administrative appeals, and that plaintiffs may challenge the process only after the final EIS is approved).
292. See, e.g., NRDC v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 399 F. Supp. 2d 386, 399 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) ("When specialists express conflicting views, the court must defer to the agency's reliance on its own qualified experts, 'even if, as an original matter, a court might find contrary views more persuasive'") (citations omitted);
293. Akpan v. Koch, 75 N.Y.2d 561, 570 (1990) (quoting Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 N.Y.2d, at 416) ("While judicial review must be meaningful, the courts may not substitute their judgment for that of the agency for it is not their role to 'weigh the desirability of any action or [to] choose among alternatives.'");
294. Roosevelt Islanders for Responsible Southtown Dev. v. Roosevelt Island Operating Corp., 735 N.Y.S.2d 83, 96 (App. Div. 2001) ("differing conclusions reached by other experts concerning the potential adverse environmental impacts are insufficient to annul an agency's determination") .
295. See Gretchen Morgenson, Aiding the Schools That Gave Them a Chance, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 13, 2006, at F34 (discussing a $200 million donation in March 2006 from the Dawn M. Greene and the Jerome L. Greene Foundation to establish a neuroscience center).
296. See Sarah Garland, High Expectations Surround School Due to Open in Harlem, THE NEW YORK SUN, Nov. 7, 2006, at 4;
297. David Greenhouse, Mayor Presents School for M'Ville, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, Oct. 24, 2005.
298. N.Y. CITY, N.Y., CITY CHARTER §§ 197-c(h), 197-d(c) (2004).
299. 483 U.S. 825 (1987).
300. The City Law Department relies upon The Role of Amenities in the Land Use Process, SPECIAL COMM. OF THE ASS'N OF BAR OF N.Y. CITY (1988), available at http://www.abcny.org/pdf/report/RoleofAmenitiesintheLandUseProcess.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
301. Id. at 30.
302. See Andrew G. Dietderich, An Egalitarian's Market: The Economics of Inclusionary Zoning Reclaimed, 24 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 23, 45-46 (discussing three types of inclusionary zoning);
303. Jonathon Douglass Witten, The Cost of Developing Affordable Housing: At What Price? 30 B.C. ENVTL. AFF. L. REV. 509, 548-50 (noting that inclusionary zoning has been successful in increasing the availability of low-income housing in several urban centers);
304. Brian R. Lerman, Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning-The Answer to the Affordable Housing Problem, 33 B.C. ENTTL. AFF. L. REV. 383, 388-89 (listing affordable housing, economically mixed neighborhoods, and reduced urban sprawl among the benefits of inclusionary zoning);
305. Increasing Housing Opportunity in New York City: The Case for Inclusionary Zoning, POLICYLINK & PRATT INST. CTR. FOR CMTY. & ENVTL. DEV. (2004), available at http://www.prattcenter.net/pubs/izreport.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
306. In this way, the re-zoning would increase vastly the market value of the land that Columbia purchased under current zoning, giving the University a substantial financial windfall. The density increase proposed by Columbia would exacerbate significantly many adverse impacts of its expansion, e.g., congestion, pollution, loss of light and river views, strain on transportation and sanitation.
307. Columbia could meet this requirement by buying and renovating existing housing or building new housing. It could fund acquisition by, or transfer ownership to, building residents (individually or collectively) or well-established nonprofit community-based housing providers in West Harlem, e.g. West Harlem Group Assistance, www.whga.org, and Harlem Congregations for Community Involvement, www.hcci.org. WE ACT calculates that if Columbia were to provide affordable housing equivalent to 20% of its increased floor area (a typical inclusionary zoning requirement), West Harlem would gain roughly 1,000 additional units of permanently affordable housing.
308. West Harlem Special District: A Zoning Proposal by Manhattan Borough President Scott M. Stringer (April 2007). available at http://www.beta.mbpo.org/press/pressreleases/ file.2007-05-04.3125015854 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
309. On special zoning districts to mitigate gentrification, see Peter Marcuse, Gentrification, Abandonment and Displacement: Connections, Causes and Policy Responses in New York City, 28 WASH. U.J. URB. & CONTEMP. L. 195, 231-34 & nn.63-66 (1985);
310. Peter Marcuse, To Control Gentrification: Anti-Displacement Zoning and Planning for Stable Residential Districts, 13 N.Y.U. REV. L. & SOC. CHANGE 931, 935-38 (1985).
311. They also started looking into tax increment financing, widespread in California, by which me City would allocate for development of affordable housing a substantial percentage of increases in property tax revenue resulting from the expansion and its secondary impacts. See Benjamin B. Quinones, Redevelopment Redefined: Revitalizing the Central City with Resident Control, 27 U. MICH. J.L. REFORM 689 (1994);
312. see also James R. Paetsch & Roger K. Dahlstrom, Tax Increment Financing: What It Is and How it Works, In FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: AN INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE 82 (Richard D. Bingham et al. eds., 1990).
313. See Cole, Macho Law Brains, supra note 7, at 697-703.
314. See Letter Agreement between Columbia University and Empire State Development Corporation (July 30, 2004) (on file with authors).
315. Columbia's draft EIS discusses the potential use of eminent domain to acquire the land from holdouts and the land under the streets for the underground part of their campus. See COLUMBIA DRAFT EIS, supra note 18. Columbia can acquire the land under the streets from the city only if that land ceases to be used as a public space.
316. See N.Y. CITY, N. Y., CITY CHARTER § 383 (2004) ("The rights of the city in and to its . . . streets, avenues, highways, . . . and all other public places are hereby declared to be inalienable; but upon the closing or discontinuance of any street, avenue,. . . or other public place, the property may be sold or otherwise disposed of as may be provided by law. . . . Nothing herein contained shall prevent the granting of franchises, permits, and licenses in respect to inalienable property.");
317. N.Y. GEN. CITY LAW § 20(2) (McKinney 2003) ("Subject to the constitution and general laws of this state, every city is empowered . . . to acquire real and personal property within the limits of the city, for any public or municipal purpose, and to sell and convey the same, but the rights of a city in and to its waterfront, ferries, bridges, wharf property, land under water, public landings, wharves, docks, streets, avenues, parks, and all other public places, are hereby declared to be inalienable, except in the cases provided for by subdivision seven of this section.") (emphasis added).
318. See N.Y. EM. DOM. PROC. LAW § 201 (McKinney 2002) (describing the necessity of public hearings in the eminent domain process).
319. 545 U.S. 469 (2005).
320. See id. at 479-84.
321. See J. Daniel Cloud, Supreme Court Rules American Homes Can Now Be Seized for Private Use, LP NEWS (Wash., D.C.), Aug. 1, 2005 (criticism from the Libertarian Party);
322. Rep. Ron Paul, Lessons from the Kelo Decision, LEWROCKWELL.COM, July 5, 2005, http://www.lewrockwell.com/ paul/paul259.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (criticism from a representative);
323. Warren Richey, Fracas Over Home Seizures Moves to States, THE CHRISTIAN SCI. MONITOR (Boston, Mass.), Dec. 15, 2005, http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1215/p01s01uspo.html?s=widep (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (citing a poll that found that public opposition to the decision ranges from 70 to 90%);
324. Barry Yeoman, Whose House Is It Anyway? When A City's Quest for Renewal Means the Death of an Old Neighborhood, AARP (Magazine), May 2005, http://www.barryyeoman.com/articles/eminentdomain.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (criticism from AARP);
325. Hilary O. Shelton, Dir., NAACP Wash. Bureau, The Supreme Court's Kelo Decision and Potential Congressional Response, Sept. 22, 2005, http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/shelton092205.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (statement from the NAACP); Press Release, The Am. Conservative Union, Judicial Activism Strikes Again: Supreme Court Rules Government Can Seize Your Home (June 23, 2005), available at http://www.conservative.org/pressroom/ 06232005_un.asp (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (criticism from the American Conservative Union).
326. See Tresa Baldas, Eminent Domain Takes a Big Hit, NAT'L L.J., NOV. 13, 2006, at 6;
327. Mary M. Ross & Kristen Tolan, Legislative Responses to Kelo v. City of New London and Subsequent Court Decisions - One Year Later, 16 J. OF AFFORDABLE Hous. & CMTY. DEV. L. 52 (2006);
328. Donald Lambro, Alabama Limits Eminent Domain, THE WASH. TIMES, Aug. 4, 2005, at Al (describing Alabama as "the first state to enact new protections against local-government seizure of property allowed under [Kelo,] a Supreme Court ruling that has triggered an explosive grass-roots counteroffensive across the country"); S. 1313, 109th Cong. (2005), available at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/ doc_archive/jc_other/PHSB%20and%20PPA%202005%20billtext. pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (outlining the Senate bill introduced to limit eminent domain);
329. Rebecca S. Bender, Organizers Circulate Petitions to Limit Eminent Domain in State, THE EUREKA REP. (Eureka, Cal.), Mar. 19, 2006, available at http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay. aspx?ArticleID=9290 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (describing the failed referendum effort in California);
330. Bill Peacock, Protecting Private Property Rights in Texas after Kelo, TEX. PUB. POL'Y FOUND., NOV. 2005, available at http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2005-11- 08-pp-kelo.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (discussing efforts in Texas);
331. Legislative Action Since Kelo, CASTLE COALITION, Jan. 16, 2007, available at http://www.castlecoalition.org/pdf/ publications/State-Summary-Publication.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (describing state legislative action after Kelo; Richey, supra note 158.
332. See Kelo v. New London: Lawsuit Challenging Eminent Domain Abuse in New London, Connecticut, INST. FOR JUST., http://www.ij .org/private_property/connecticut/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (describing the case and containing links to information about the Institute's role).
333. See Diane Cardwell, Gotbaum is Victorious in the Runoff, N.Y TIMES, Oct. 12, 2001, at D1 (describing Norman Siegel as the former executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union and a candidate for public advocate);
334. E.R. Shipp, Columbia U. Gets to Steal from L'il Guy, N.Y. DAILY NEWS, July 10, 2005, at 35 (describing Norman Siegel as representing the West Harlem Business Group).
335. For this project, Columbia invoked both the classic justification of "blight," see Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954), and an expansive version of the alternative justification accepted in Kelo. Columbia's expansion offers not only economic development (within and near the site, and for the City as a whole), which satisfied the Court in Kelo, but also improvement of the City's cultural, education, intellectual and scientific life. The University's September 2006 draft submission to ESDC, obtained by the Columbia Spectator under the NYS Freedom of Information Law, makes both arguments: that the area is blighted and that Columbia's planned use is a "civic project." See Manhattanville in West Harlem: Land Use Improvement and Civic Project General Project Plan, Columbia University (Sept. 2006) (on file with authors); see also Erin Durkin & Anna Phillips, Draft Plan Provides for Eminent Domain, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, Jan. 31, 2007, at Al.
336. See Giovanna D'Orazio, Comment, Taking Private Property to Build an Urban Sports Arena: A Valid Exercise of Eminent Domain Powers?, 69 ALB. L. REV. 1135, 1136-44 (2006) (describing New York state law allowing the taking of private property for public purposes or benefit rather than public use);
337. Nasim Farjad, Condemnation Friendly: New York's Broad Interpretation of the Public Use Requirement Works Well for New York, 76 FORDHAM L. REV. (forthcoming 2007) (on file with the Fordham Law Review).
338. See D'Orazio, supra note 163, at 1144 (describing the post-Kelo New York statute as "explicitly stat[ing] that urban renewal is a valid public purpose and use of land for which a municipality may extend its takings power"); Ross & Tolan, supra note 159, at 67.
339. See Charles V. Bagli & Robin Shulman, Transforming Bronx Terminal Market, But At a Steep Price, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 24, 2005, at B1 (describing opposition to the Bronx Terminal Market plan);
340. Nicholas Confessore, Another Step For Downtown Brooklyn Project, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 16, 2005, at B10 (describing opposition to Atlantic Yards plan).
341. See generally supra Part II (describing Columbia's expansion in the context of the existing neighborhood).
342. See supra notes 95-100 and accompanying text.
343. Erin Durkin, LDC Defers Land-Use Demands: Eminent Domain Not a Condition for CBA Talks, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, Oct. 31, 2006 [hereinafter Durkin, LDC Defers Land-Use Demands].
344. See supra notes 42-48 and accompanying text.
345. See National Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437 (stating that it is the policy of the federal government to promote the general welfare by helping States address and remedy the lack of affordable housing available to low-income residents); N.Y. PUB. HOUS. LAW § 401 (McKinney 1989) (constituting the New York City Housing Authority as a nonprofit public corporation);
346. Rachell Blatt, Public Housing: The Controversy and the Contribution, in CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON HOUSING (Rachell Blatt, et. al., eds, 1986).
347. Telephone interview with Judith Goldiner, Senior Attorney, N.Y. City Legal Aid Society, and counsel to the City-wide federation of public housing tenants associations, N.Y., N.Y. (Apr. 12, 2005). Nor has the New York City Housing Authority been making use of the federal Hope VI program under which large numbers of public housing units are destroyed to create lower-density, mixed-income mixed-use projects. See Nigal Pindell, Is There Hope for Hope VI?: Community Economic Development and Localism, 35 CONN. L. REV. 385 (2003)
348. New York State does have legal authority to take municipal properties. See N.Y. GEN. MUN. LAW § 3 (McKinney 2007) (stating that the state must compensate municipal corporations for their land when they take it in exercising eminent domain).
349. The Tenant Interim Lease Program is designed to permit tenant associations to organize into cooperatives through which they purchase apartments in city-owned buildings for $250, so long as the associations meet certain requirements. See Rehabilitation: Tenant Interim Lease Apartment Purchase Program, N.Y. CITY DEPT. OF HOUS. PRES. & DEV., http://home2.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/ developers/til.shtml (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). The tenant groups purchase a liability insurance policy and then sign an 11-month lease with the Department of Housing Preservation and Development ("HPD"), and the HPD provides funding for major repairs, and, once the tenants learn to manage the buildings, they may purchase them.
350. See Nancy A Brownstein, Comment, The Warranty of Habitability As Applied to New York City In Rem Housing: A Premature Promise, 50 BROOK. L. REV. 1103, 1109 n.38 (1984).
351. The tenant association must demonstrate "the tenants' desire and ability to self-manage;" additionally, once the associations have been accepted, they must "maintain and manage the buildings in which they live. " N.Y. CITY DEPT. OF HOUS. PRES. & DEV., supra. The buildings are formerly abandoned tenements taken over by the City through real estate tax foreclosure, and therefore are known as "in rem" buildings.
352. Id; see generally Frank Braconi, In re in Rem: Innovation and Expediency in New York's Housing Policy, in HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN NEW YORK CITY: FACING THE FUTURE 93 (Michael H. Shill ed., 1999) (describing New York City's In Rem housing program, which transfers ownership of residential properties obtained through in rem real estate tax foreclosure from the city to tenant co-ops, non-profit organizations and private, for-profit owners, and highlighting some of the challenges associated with the TIL program).
353. See Durkin, Relocation Discussions, supra note 37.
354. It did carefully reserve its right to use eminent domain to gain ownership of commercial properties. Walker, Columbia Rules Out Evictions, supra note 103.
355. See Barbara Bezdck, To Attain "The Just Rewards of So Much Struggle": Local-Resident Equity Participation in Urban Revitalization, 35 HOFSTRA L. REV. 37, 61-63 (2006) and sources cited therein.
356. See CARO, supra note 64.
357. See Bagli, Columbia, In a Growth Spurt, supra note 16;
358. Denny Lee, On the Heights, A Chill Wind Begins to Blow, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 14, 2003, § 14, at 1;
359. Columbia's History of Displacing Communities, COAL. TO PRES. COLUM., available at http://www.stopcolumbia.org/ content/view/44/59/lang,en/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
360. MEDOFF & SKLAR, supra note 60; See also a number of New Deal projects, including early Robert Moses projects in New York such as public beaches (e.g., Jones Beach, Orchard Beaches) and working class housing developments (e.g., Co-op City, Stuyvesant Town). See CARO, supra note 64; Ross & Tolan, supra note 159, at 79 (discussing City of Hercules, California, use of eminent domain against Wal-Mart to prevent "urban blight" from its planned construction of a big box store on the site); Nicolai Ouroussoff, Complex, Contradictory Robert Moses, N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 2, 2007, at E31.
361. See Elizabeth Martinez & Arnoldo Garcia, What is Neoliberalism? A Brief Definition for Activists, CORPWATCH, http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376 (last visited Oct. 5, 2007) (defining neoliberalism).;
362. SPACES OF NEOLIBERALISM, supra note 62,
363. See Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003); Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003).
364. Medoff and Sklar, supra note 60.
365. This coalition, Re-Defining Economic Development or RED NY, was developed to "create a blueprint that offers a comprehensive and alternative vision of what development should look like in the Bloomberg era." Mark Winston Griffith, Redefining Economic Development, GOTHAM GAZETTE N.Y. CITY NEWS & POL'Y (Feb. 2006), available at http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/ communitydevelopment/20060224/20/1771 (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
366. see also Redefining Economic Development NYC: Creating A Blueprint for New York City's Progressive Development Movement, JOBS WITH JUST. N.Y., http://www.nyjwj.org/red.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). Sponsoring organizations include Jobs with Justice New York, the Brennan Center for Justice, Good Jobs New York, and the Pratt Center for Community & Environmental Development. See id. The goal was to figure out how to get more public benefits from those developments that were being subsidized or incentivized by the city or state. Id. Jobs with Justice's lead organizer had recently arrived from Los Angeles, where she had played a central role in winning the first CBAs.
367. See Urban America Takes a Stand on Wal-Mart, L.A. ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECON., http://www.laane.org/walmart/pressbios.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (including a biography of Adrianne Shropshire, current executive director of Jobs with Justice New York, that also identifies her with AGENDA (Action for Grassroots Empowerment and Neighborhood Development Alternatives) of Los Angeles).
368. Memorandum from the Brennan Center for Justice to Members of the Rezoning Task Force of Community Board 9 (Nov. 12, 2004) (on file with authors).
369. A Local Development Corporation (LDC) is a special type of New York State nonprofit. N.Y. NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORP. LAW § 1411 (McKinney 2005). This section lays out the process that permits incorporation of not-for-profit corporations for public purposes and outlines the powers and functions of an LDC. See id.
370. CB9 eventually agreed on an LDC board of 13, later expanded to 17, and then to 26 to accommodate representatives of each elected official whose district includes any part of commumty district 9. See West Harlem Land Development Corporation Website, http://www.westharlernldc.org/Board_Members. html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). The LDC board includes 2 representatives designated by CB9 itself. Id. The others are selected by various community groups and sectors, including 6 tenant/co-op groups ranging from low to middle income and 4 representatives of property, business or home owners. Id.
371. See Anna Philips, LDC Criticized at Public Forum, COLUM. DAILY SPECTATOR, March 28, 2007. (describing two LDC members' participation in a protest against the LDC, especially its failure to make renunciation of eminent domain a pre-condition of negotiations with the University).
372. Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3 at 320.
373. Id. at 317.
374. Id. at 315.
375. See, e.g., Browne J. Zamgba, Harlem Fightback takes on racism at the BTEA, New York Amsterdam News, October 25, 2000.
376. See supra notes 83-84 and accompanying text.
377. See Jimmy Vielkind, How to Mediate Manhattanville: A New Negotiating Partner is Born, CITY LIMITS WKLY., Dec. 4, 2006, at 1 (discussing the formation of working groups for CB9). These groups included: housing; business and economic development; employment and jobs; education; historic preservation; community facilities/social services; arts and culture; environmental stewardship; transportation; research and laboratory activities; and green spaces. See West Harlem Local Development Corporation, http://www.westharlemldc.org/Community_Benefits_Agreemen.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
378. See COLE & FOSTER, supra note 3, at 121-30 (reviewing environmental justice lawyers' efforts at using civil rights and environmental law to transform land use decision making processes which have an adverse, disparate impact on low-income and racial minority communities).
379. Luke Cole advocated using the requirement for public participation in environmental and land use laws as a strategy very early on in environmental justice legal advocacy. He found early success with this strategy in Kettleman City, California, where he was able to convince a state court to require that the Environmental Impact Report be translated into Spanish so that the predominantly Spanish-speaking community could meaningfully participate in the public comment process. See Cole, Empowerment as the Key, supra note 7; see also Cole, Macho Law Brains, supra note 7, at 697-703 (describing and embracing the "power model" of environmental justice advocacy which views the public participation process as largely co-optive of community opposition but nevertheless useful "as a vehicle for organizing communities and a means to community empowerment").
380. Pluralism was never the ideal model to resolve highly contentious public issues, particularly those involving contested land use issues which almost always involve stark inequalities in economic power, knowledge and opportunities to shape the development plan among the stakeholders (particularly as between developers and affected, often low income, communities). Pluralist decision making processes almost always favor the developer due to the simple fact that opportumties for public participation most often come after the development proposal or plan has been crafted and preliminarily agreed upon by the developer and the local government. See COLE & FOSTER, supra note 3, at 106-14 (critiquing the pluralist model in the environmental justice context); see also Eileen Gauna, The Environmental Justice Misfit: Public Participation and the Paradigm Paradox, 17 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 3 (1998).
381. Community Land Trusts are nonprofit accountable local entities that hold title to land and lease it to co-ops, homeowners, mutual housing associations, nonprofit community based developers, etc. under lease agreements that enforce long term affordability. See Kirby White & Charles Matthei, Community Land Trusts, in BEYOND THE MARKET AND THE STATE: NEW DIRECTIONS IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 41 (Severyn T. Bruyn & James Meehan eds., 1987);
382. see also Community Land Trusts (CLTs), COMMUNITY- WEALTH.ORG, http://www.commumty-wealth.org/strategies/panel/ clts/index.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007);
383. Community Land Trust Resource Center, BURLINGTON Assoes., http://www.burlingtonassociates.com/resources/ archives/clt_101/index.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
384. See infra notes 201-219 and accompanying text. Our concept of role integration is similar to Scott Cummings' "tactical pragmatism," infra note 220.
385. Most of the literature on community lawyering focuses on work with grassroots groups, often informal or newly forming, without substantial political or organizational experience, formal education, funds, capacity or resources. See, e.g., Michael Diamond, Community Lawyering: Revisiting the Old Neighborhood, 32 COLUM. HUM. RTS. L. REV. 67, 108-30 (2000);
386. David Dominguez, Getting Beyond Yes to Collaborative Justice: The Role of Negotiation in Community Lawyering, 12 GEO. J. ON POVERTY L. & POL'Y 55, 57-59 (2005);
387. Gerald P. Lopez, Shaping Community Problem Solving Around Community Knowledge, 79 N.Y.U. L. REV. 59, 59-62 (2004);
388. Lucie E. White, Collaborative Lawyering in the Field? On Mapping the Paths From Rhetoric to Practice, 1 CLINICAL L. REV. 157, 161 (1994) [hereinafter White, Collaborative Lawyering];
389. Lucie E. White, "Democracy" in Development Practice: Essays on a Fugitive Theme, 64 TENN. L. REV. 1073, 1077-78 (1997) [hereinafter, White, Democracy in Development Practice]. Of the few articles that discuss community lawyering for larger, stable, developed organizational clients, such as ACORN, most advocate and describe a very restricted role for the lawyer. Much like a plumber or repair person, she is brought in for a specific job-generally litigation, usually on defense-and then gets, or is moved, out of the way.
390. See Steve Bachmann, Lawyers, Law, and Social Change, 13 N.Y.U. REV. L. & SOC. CHANGE 1 (1984-85);
391. William P. Quigley, Reflections of Community Organizers: Lawyering for Empowerment of Community Organizations, 21 OHIO N.U. L. REV. 455, 474 (1994) (quoting an organizer as saying that "the lawyer should be on tap, and not on top") (internal quotation marks omitted).
392. Indeed, community economic development practice does often pair more established, high-capacity organizations with lawyers who sometimes aspire to emulate corporate house counsel. For the most part, however, the lawyers provide technical assistance in complex real estate transactions involving intricate debt, equity and bond financing including a variety of federal and state tax credits. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 309;
393. Martha Minow, Lawyering for Human Dignity, 11 AM. U.J. GENDER SOC. POL'Y & L. 143, 163 (2003). Much of the lawyering is provided by major firms pro bono or by smaller specialty private firms remunerated through project financing.
394. See Thomas H. Morsch, Discovering Transactional Pro Bono, 72 UMKC L. REV. 423 (2003) (discussing the pro bono work that transactional lawyers do in the community economic development context). At least one legal services program, however, has developed a far more collaborative client-centered approach to CED lawyering, which is chronicled in a law review account by a long-time participant and co-author of this article.
395. See Brian Glick & Matthew J. Rossman, Neighborhood Legal Services as House Counsel to Community-Based Efforts to Achieve Economic Justice: The East Brooklyn Experience, 23 N.Y.U. REV. L. & SOC. CHANGE 105, 158 (1997) (describing approach of Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A, which aspires to provide client groups with "not only (almost) all traditional lawyering but also the full range of practical and strategic services which private sector corporations routinely expect of their counsel").
396. See White, Collaborative Lawyering, supra note 199, at 157-58;
397. Lucie E. White, To Learn and To Teach: Lessons from Driefontein on Lawyering and Power, 1988 WIS. L. REV. 699 (1988)
398. [hereinafter, White, Lessons from Driefontein].
399. See Michael Diamond, Community Lawyering: Revisiting the Old Neighborhood, 32 COLUM. HUM. RTS. L. REV. 67, 108-30 (2000).
400. Glick & Rossman, supra note 200, at 119.
401. Liegeois & Carson, supra note 53, at 187.
402. In acting in this role, lawyers assess possible court or administrative actions, claims and defenses; their costs and their potential for achieving various ends (damages, injunction, law change, delay, public education, community empowerment, official exposure and embarrassment, discovery, government or corporate concessions, etc.); and either represent the organization or arrange and monitor such representation. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 326-28. These elements fit into lawyering in White's first dimension as well as, to some degree, her second.
403. See White, Collaborative Lawyering, supra note 199, at 157-58.
404. For example, helping to structure, memorialize, monitor and implement deals and projects; choosing, designing and maintaining legal entities; drafting and analyzing agreements; providing basic information on corporate, tax, contract, and real estate law; and providing regulatory counseling and representation. See Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3, at 27; Glick and Rossman, supra note 200; Gross, supra note 52, at 11-14.
405. For example, analyzing political and legal leverage points and ways to exploit them; helping map formal and informal decision processes; helping identify and mobilize sources of support; helping neutralize or weaken potential opposition; helping build alliances and resolve conflicts; and helping design, evaluate and adapt structures and processes for community power. See Gary Bellow, Steady Work: A Practitioner's Reflections on Political Lawyering, 31 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 297, 301, 306 (1996);
406. Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3 at 325.
407. For example, acting formally or behind the scenes; within the commumty; with potential allies and adversaries; and with public officials, developers, etc.; helping to formulate "win-win" approaches where possible; otherwise, to formulate demands, identify deal breakers, assess trade-offs, devise and evaluate bargaining tactics. See Dominguez, supra note 199, at 56
408. For example, helping grassroots community members to understand the decision processes, their participation rights, the players, stakes, possibilities and trade-offs; helping them prepare to exercise their rights (e.g., testimony at hearings, written comments) and to fight for additional opportunities to intervene; and learning their needs, experiences and ideas. This is White's third dimension lawyering. See White, Collaborative Lawyering, supra note 199 and accompanying text. It requires lawyers who are "multi-lingual" not only in Spanish, English and other languages but also in their fluency in both community vernacular and legal, bureaucratic and business jargon.
409. For example, helping identify and involve sources of expertise, funds, access, information, and influence; and helping involve other community, city-wide, etc. groups and institutions. See Glick & Rossman, supra note 200, passim (1997); White, Collaborative Lawyering, supra note 199 at 166.
410. For example, conceptualizing, drafting, and editing legislative, regulatory, project, policy and funding proposals, testimony and written comments, position papers, reports, press releases, leaflets, agreements, etc. Liegeois & Carson, supra note 53 at 187; Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3 at 321.
411. For example, helping to influence law makers, and other decision makers and opinion leaders; helping plan, implement, evaluate and adapt strategy and tactics to gain influence; and help set up, prepare for, and conduct meetings with law makers. See Bellow, supra note 207 at 304-05; Cummings, Mobilization Lawyering, supra note 3 at 320 (discussing the role of lawyers in negotiating a CBA with Los Angeles city council members); Glick & Rossman, supra note 200 at 119.
412. For example, research, analysis, support, etc. for up-front advocacy, negotiation, lobbying, community education, etc., by other members of the organization's team. See Glick & Rossman, supra note 200 at 119 (discussing lawyers roles as tacticians on management teams).
413. See Stephen Loffredo, Poverty Law and Community Activism: Notes from a Law School Clinic, 150 U. PA. L. REV. 173, 176-77 (2001).
414. Although a young organization made up largely of current and former welfare recipients, WRI quickly developed-with support from social work faculty at CUNY's Hunter College campus-substantial organizational capacity and a skilled full-time staff. See id. at 202-204 (describing the growth within the organization and its relationship to the affiliation with the CUNY clinic).
415. See id. at 189-96. Ultimately, the legislature, while not passing all of the reforms suggested by WRI, passed legislation "that significantly expands welfare recipients' access to higher education." Id. at 195. Despite opposition by the City government under then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani the governor signed the bill after significant lobbying and organizing efforts by WRI. See id. at 195-96.
416. Though WRI controls referrals, each recipient thereafter becomes a clinic client and WRI participates no further in her case. See id. at 193 n.88.
417. Note that the Loffredo article, supra note 214, does not focus on the negotiated structure of the relationship between the clinic and WRI, nor does it discuss whether alternative arrangements had been proposed and rejected.
418. See Loffredo, supra note 214, at 191-93. Note that the clinic could ethically involve WRI more if the group's role were specified in the retainer or engagement letter. See JENNIFER GORDON, SUBURBAN SWEATSHOPS: THE FIGHT FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS 199-200 (2005) (describing a retainer in which the Workplace Project agreed to provide legal support to a worker on a particular issue and, in return, the affected worker promised to participate actively in his or her own case).
419. This is evident in Fordham's work with WE ACT even before the addition of in house counsel, in much of the CUNY Law-WRI collaboration, and in the work of Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A's community development unit. See Loffredo, supra note 214; Glick and Rossman, supra note 200. An especially impressive example of functional without physical integration is the work of Margo Feinberg, a labor lawyer in private practice who was retained to coordinate the legal arm of the multi-faceted community/labor struggle against Wal-Mart analyzed by Scott Cummings in this colloquium. Cummings, Law in the Labor Movement's Challenge to Wal-Mart: A Case Study of the Inglewood Site Fight, 95 CALIF L. REV. 1952-54, 1965-72 (2007).
420. See Deborah A. DeMott, The Discrete Roles of General Counsel, 74 FORDHAM L. REV. 955, 955 (2005) (describing the evolution of the in-house counsel position and the amorphous roles these lawyers often play);
421. Robert L. Nelson & Laura Beth Nielson, Cops, Counsel and Entrepreneurs: Constructing the Role of Inside Counsel in Large Corporations, 34 LAW & SOC'Y REV. 457, 462-68 (2000) (discussing three ideal types of in-house counsel: the cop, who is largely independent of the corporate environment and focuses almost exclusively on legal gatekeeping; the counselor, who provides advice on ethics, business decisions and situational concerns, in addition to purely legal matters; and the entrepreneur, who is deeply involved in business decisions and aggressively leverages legal strategies to increase business profits and advance corporate goals);
422. Marc I. Steinberg, The Role of Inside Counsel in the 1990s: A View from Outside, 49 SMU L. REV. 483, 494 (1996) (describing the vital role that in-house counsel plays in providing legal advice and shaping corporate policy, but noting the possible conflict of interest where in-house counsel serves as a board member involved in broad decision-making);
423. E. Norman Veasey and Christine T. Di Guglielmo, The Tensions, Stresses, and Professional Responsibilities of the Lawyer for the Corporation, 62 BUS. LAW 1, §I (2006) (noting the many roles played by in-house counsel including: legal advisor, business advisor, mediator, compliance officer, governmental affairs officer, corporate advocate, gatekeeper and ethicist).
424. This approach is employed by Make the Road by Walking, a multi-issue membership organization based in the Bushwick section of Brooklyn, NY. See Telephone Interview with Andrew Friedman, Co-Dir., Make the Road by Walking, in N.Y., N.Y. (Feb. 2, 2007); see also Make the Road by Walking, http://www.maketheroad.org/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
425. This approach was used during much of the 1990s by the Workplace Project in Long Island. See GORDON, supra note 219, at 199-200 (explaining that those who wanted legal representation from the project were required to participate in the project as well).
426. Robert M. Segal, Labor Union Lawyers: Professional Services of Lawyers to Organized Labor, 5 INDUS. & LAB. REL. REV. 343, 363 (1951-52).
427. These accounts include biographies of two progressive lawyers who served as inhouse general counsel to major national industrial unions in the great organizing years of the late 1930s and early 1940s. Maurice Sugar was general counsel to the United Auto Workers from 1937- 1947. See CHRISTOPHER H. JOHNSON, MAURICE SUGAR: LAW, LABOR, AND THE LEFT IN DETROIT, 1912-1950, at 11 (1988). Lee Pressmen was general counsel to the CIO and its Steel Workers Organizing Committee (later the United Steelworkers) from 1936 to 1948.
428. See GILBERT J. GALL, PURSUING JUSTICE: LEE PRESSMAN, THE NEW DEAL, AND THE CIO viii (1999). In addition, Arthur Kinoy, known mainly for his leading role as an attorney for the 1960s civil rights movement, devotes a chapter of his autobiography to his work in the late 1940s as in-house counsel to the United Electrical Workers Union.
429. See ARTHUR KINOY, RIGHTS ON TRIAL: THE ODYSSEY OF A PEOPLE'S LAWYER (1983).
430. Finally, Carol King's work with labor unions in the 1930s and 1940s is documented in ANN FAGAN GINGER, CAROL WEISS KING: HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER, 1895-1952 (1993).
431. For a comprehensive discussion of this tradition of labor lawyering, see Jennifer Gordon, Law, Lawyers, and Labor: The United Farm Workers ' Legal Strategy in the 1960s and 1970s and the Role of Law in Union Organizing Today, 8 U. PA. J. LAB. & EMP. L. 1, 45 (2005)
432. [hereinafter, Gordon, Law, Lawyers, and Labor].
433. See generally Gordon, Law, Lawyer, and Labor, supra note 225 (discussing the integrative lawyering strategies employed by the UFW to strengthen organizing efforts, build political power and create a framework of legally enforceable rights).
434. See David Luban, The Noblesse Oblige Tradition in the Practice of Law, 41 VAND. L. REV. 717, 731 (1988).
435. The intensity of its challenge to corporate and state power made CRLA the prime target of then Governor Reagan's attempts to shut down legal services. See Robert Hornstein, Daniel G. Atkins & Treena A. Kaye, The Politics of Equal Justice, 11 AM. U.J. GENDER SOC. POL'Y & L. 1089, 1094 (2003). Gary Bellow, CRLA's deputy director during this time, was for many years a prominent leader and national spokesperson for progressive political lawyering. He published prolifically, including a well-respected textbook.
436. See GARY BELLOW & BEATRICE MOULTON, THE LAWYERING PROCESS: MATERIALS FOR CLINICAL INSTRUCTION IN ADVOCACY (1978). See also Bellow, supra note 207 passim (discussing Bellow 's distinguished career as a political lawyer).
437. See Gordon, Law, Lawyers, and Labor, supra note 225, at 14.
438. See id.
439. See id. at 14-15.
440. This is a secondary boycott since the union asked consumers not only to boycott products grown or manufactured by an employer with which the union has a dispute, but also broadens the focus, for example, by asking consumers to boycott an entire store because that store sells the disputed product. Id. at 24-25. Secondary boycotts are banned under the National Labor Relations Act. See id. at 24. Although the NLRA does not cover farm workers, the UFW did represent nine workers in a commercial peanut shed who were covered. UFW lawyers created a new union and moved the nine workers into that union, freeing the UFW to mount what proved to be one of its most powerful weapons. See id. at 15.
441. See id. at 28-35 (discussing the passage of the ALRA).
442. Id. at 16.
443. Id.
444. See Jennifer Gordon, A Movement in the Wake of a New Law: The United Farm Workers and the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act, in CAUSE LAWYERS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS 277, 286-86 (Austin Sarat & Stuart A. Scheingold eds., 2006) also available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=733424 or DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.733424 Apparently threatened by his declining control, Chavez won approval from a divided union executive board to fire or drive out most of the lawyers and younger lead organizers, and the union collapsed at the peak of its growth. Conflicting explanations abound. Chavez blamed the new law and resulting shift in the UFW's center of gravity toward lawyers and legal action. Some leading UFW organizers attribute the collapse more to Chavez's "founder syndrome" and his difficulty sharing leadership and adapting to the union's new, more bureaucratic and legal circumstances. See Gordon, supra note 219.
445. Another model is provided by the work of Maurice Sugar, who served as general counsel to the United Auto Workers (UAW), from its formation in 1939 to the ouster of its progressive founding leaders in 1947. See JOHNSON, supra note 225, at 11, 14. The UAW was at that time the country's largest union. Id. at 11. In that period, Sugar was an influential member of the union's national leadership, with a voice in most key decisions. He served as negotiator and public advocate. He testified at legislative hearings, wrote in Detroit newspapers and was a popular public speaker. Id. at 52, 60, 168. He played a key role in drafting the UAW's constitution and ensuring it was applied to protect internal democracy. Id. at 258-59. He was deeply involved in teaching workers their rights in ways that facilitated organizing. He set up and oversaw the union's benefits programs and advised union locals on group insurance plans. Id. at 282.
446. These organizations include Alternatives for Community and Environment (ACE), Communities for a Better Environment (CBE), and the Center on Race, Poverty, and the Environment (CRPE). See Alternatives for Community and Environment, http://www.ace-ej.org/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007); Communities for a Better Environment, http://www.cbecal.org/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007); Center on Race, Poverty, and the Environment, http://www.crpe-ej.org/ (last visited Oct. 3, 2007). We base some of our analysis in this section on conversations with past and present staff at these three organizations. Telephone Interview with Carline Farrell, Managing Attorney, CRPE, in N.Y., N.Y. (Feb. 6, 2007).
447. See ALBERT BANDURA, SELF-EFFICACY: THE EXERCISE OF CONTROL (1997).
448. See supra note 238 and accompanying text. As an added bonus, she was a biology Ph.D. who knew the underlying science and was skilled in breaking it down for a lay audience.
449. See WE ACT, Official Written Comments, supra note 24.
450. See Hell's Kitchen Neighborhood Ass'n, supra note 140. The court noted in that case that if and when final approval is granted, petitioners may subject the process as a whole to judicial review. See id.
451. Columbia's proposal to include major biological research facilities in its West Harlem campus has alarmed the community. The university has said it will not research dangerous viruses such as anthrax or Ebola ("BSL-4") and will sign a CBA to that effect, but has not included such a restriction in its proposed re-zoning. The BSL-3 research that Columbia does plan requires a more nuanced community response since it covers not only lethal airborne viruses like SARS but also HIV/AIDS research which poses no risks and offers enormous potential benefit to Harlem residents. See supra note 36 and accompanying text.
452. Among the country's leaders in training teachers, school administrators, doctors and public health professionals, Columbia has the capacity in-house to provide such benefits on a grand scale, including local asthma and AIDS clinics and reduced or no-tuition admission into the University for local students who do well in the schools it sponsors. Such benefits offer a win-win synergy in which the University gains practical educational opportunities for its graduate students in the course of helping the community. They are among the main benefits that other major urban universities have provided to neighboring communities during periods of expansion.
453. See http://www.annenberginstitute.org/CIP/index.html (last visited Oct. 3, 2007) (describing work of the Community Involvement Program of the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, a New York City affiliate of Brown University).
454. In its involvement in the LDC, and in educational presentations to tenant associations and commumty activists, the legal team is taking great care to be clear that its client is WE ACT and that it is not forming an attorney client relationship with any other group or individual. On the danger of inadvertently forming such a relationship, and similar legal ethical issues in community lawyering, see Shauna I. Marshall, Mission Impossible?: Ethical Community Lawyering, 7 CLINICAL LAW REV. 147 (2000).
455. See supra note 44 and accompanying text.
456. New York City offers purchase and operating subsidies and some supportive services. See Co-op Conversion Program, N.Y. CITY HOUS. DEV. CORP., available at http://www.nychdc.com/pdf/developers/coopconversion_termsheet.pdf (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).