Today, the residents of Flushing and Queens have won a great victory against big developers, the Mets and the government of New York City, all of whom tried to steal 45 acres of our public parkland in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park.

The perpetrators in question - the Wilpon family (who owns the Mets baseball team) and the Related Companies - formed a development entity known as Queens Development Group, LLC. As the winning bidders to develop the Willets Point Urban Renewal area, where the automobile junkyards have been located for over a half century, their mandate was to build a new community based on the zoning approved in 2008. This new community was to have millions of square feet of commercial buildings as well as residential development (including affordable housing), a school and new parkland. All of this was to be built on the private property to the east of Flushing Meadows-Corona Park and Citifield.

In 2013, Queens Development Group announced that they would not be able to develop Willets Point without first building a new development to the west of Citifield. They called it Willets Point West, which would be a vast "entertainment and shopping mall complex" on 45 acres of public parkland. They argued that the property was only parking lots anyway, so building a mall there was perfectly fine. 

There is only one problem with this: the city has no right to give away dedicated public parkland - whether used for a parking lot or a wilderness preserve - to private developers. 

The power to alienate public parkland and return it to private use is under the sole jurisdiction of the New York State Legislature. In essence, New York City and Queens Development Group tried to bypass that legal process by claiming that they had the right to do it under an obscure New York City law.

Soon after, State Senator Tony Avella and I, along with other property owners, residents, business groups and civic and community organizations like the Queens Civic Congress became plaintiffs in a lawsuit to stop this giveaway of public parkland to developers. The lawsuit was initiated by the City Club of New York on our behalf.

While the Supreme Court of New York, the lowest court, sided with the developers, this was overturned with a unanimous decision by the Appellate Court. Finally, today the New York State Court of Appeals - which is the highest court in New York State - affirmed that decision with a 6-1 vote.

​If the courts had allowed our public parkland to be given by the city to developers without following the normal - and very rare - process of going through the New York State Legislature, Mayor de Blasio and the City Council could have done this to any public park in New York City - Central Park, Prospect Park, Kissena Park - and, of course, Flushing Meadows-Corona Park!

The link to the decision by the Court of Appeals is below:

https://www.nycourts.gov/ ctapps/Decisions/2017/Jun17/ 54opn17-Decision.pdf

Justice Manuel Mendez, NYS Supreme Court, NY District, has issued his decision to dismiss the lawsuit brought by plaintiffs Sen. Tony Avella, City Club of New York, Queens Civic Congress and others, challenging the plan of Queens Development Group LLC to construct a 1.4 million square foot mega-mall on 40+ acres of Queens parkland.

Justice Mendez concludes that the 1961 authorization to construct Shea Stadium also allows construction of the mega-mall on parkland.

Below is the official statement of John Low-Beer, attorney for plaintiffs, concerning the decision of Justice Manuel Mendez to dismiss the case:

"Plaintiffs believe that the decision misunderstands the common law doctrine that prohibits any nonpark use of parkland without the specific and explicit approval of the State Legislature.  The State Legislature, when it passed the 1961 law permitting the construction of Shea Stadium, did not intend to allow construction of a shopping mall.  That law did not allow the construction of anything except a stadium and related facilities on the site.  Plaintiffs will appeal, and believe that this decision will be reversed on appeal."

Please head on over to Willets Point United to read the judge's decision.

Senator Avella and Advocacy Groups who are challenging the “Willets West” mega-mall proposal completed their oral arguments before Justice Mendoza yesterday

On Wednesday, the lawsuit filed by State Senator Tony Avella, City Club of New York, Queens Civic Congress, several members of Willets Point United Inc., and nearby residents/business owners against the “Willets West” mega-mall proposal was argued before the New York State Supreme Court.

Attorney John Low-Beer argued the matter on behalf of the Plaintiffs/Petitioners.

The lawsuit is challenging the give-away of 47 acres of Queens parkland worth an estimated $ 1 Billion to build the "Willets West" mega-mall adjacent to CitiField. The suit seeks a declaratory judgment to invalidate approvals already granted to the project. In addition, the suit seeks a declaratory judgment for a permanent injunction which would prevent the construction of a megamall on City parkland without respondents having obtained required State legislative authorization and without respondents having obtained any zoning for this un-zoned park area.

During the oral arguments, both parties presented their case, with the City and developers claiming entitlement to the land based on a 1961 law which authorized the construction of Shea Stadium. However, Mr. Low-Beer explained that the 1961 law never granted the defendants complete control over the premises, which is comprised of public park land. 

Following the arguments, Mr. Low-Beer stated, "As they did in their legal papers, yesterday the developers and the City spent a lot of time talking about how great their project was and very little time addressing the legal issues that are before the Court.  We argued that the defendants are brazenly violating State law and the City Charter's land use provisions, and we are confident that the Court will so hold." 

Senator Avella added, “Most of their response, in their argument, had actually nothing to do with the issue at hand. The issue is that they still have to get the necessary approval from the State Legislature and undergo the City’s land use process before being able to develop on-site. As things stand right now, the developers are illegally taking away parkland and the City is letting them! It’s absurd and I am confident that the Court will agree.”

Mr. Michael Gruen, President of The City Club of New York, stated, “Too often in recent years, the City has acted as if parks exist to generate income rather than to serve the public’s need for places for recreation and relaxation.  A strong body of law called the public trust doctrine is supposed to protect against such abuse by barring any non-park use of park land without the specific consent of the State Legislature.  When the past City administration decided, without legislative approval, to turn over a large portion of the most important park in Queens to private commercial exploitation, the City Club felt it had to act to remind present and future City administrations that parks belong to the people, not to shopping center developers.” 

Marty Kirchner, street organizer with Queens Neighborhoods United, stated:

"As a social justice organization, Queens Neighborhoods United is honored to stand by the many plaintiffs in this lawsuit who would not comprise on such a scandalous parkland give-away. Together with numerous local residents and small business owners, we believe that under no circumstances is this mega-project justified. Not only would the city's largest mall take away precious parkland, but it would significantly diminish the quality of life throughout the surrounding neighborhoods, displacing low-cost housing and reducing the ability of immigrant family-based small businesses to thrive on nearby Roosevelt Avenue." 

Senator Avella concluded, “The bottom line is that this case must be decided on merits. And from what we heard today, the defendants have no explanation as to why they did not follow the law, just that they didn’t. I think their case simply does not make sense.”

Senator Avella And Advocacy Groups who are challenging the “Willets West”
mega-mall proposal will begin their oral arguments tomorrow  
 
(Flushing, Queens) TOMORROW, Wednesday, July 30th at 2:15 PM, the lawsuit filed by State Senator Tony Avella, City Club of New York, Queens Civic Congress, several members of Willets Point United Inc., and nearby residents/business owners against the “Willets West” mega-mall proposal will be argued before the New York State Supreme Court.
 
The lawsuit is challenging the give-away of 47+ acres of Queens parkland worth
$ 1 Billion to build the "Willets West" mega-mall. The suit seeks a declaratory judgment to invalidate approvals already granted to the project as well as a declaratory judgment for a permanent injunction to prevent the construction of a megamall on City parkland without respondents having obtained required State legislative authorization and without respondents having obtained any zoning for this un-zoned park area.
 
A press conference with the plaintiffs will directly follow the oral arguments, taking place on the front steps of the Supreme Court.
 
Attorney John Low-Beer will be arguing the matter on behalf of the Plaintiffs/Petitioners and will be available to speak to the press after the Court’s adjournment.
 
WHO: Senator Tony Avella, Mr. John Low Beer, lawsuit plaintiffs, community leaders, local residents and business owners
 
WHEN: TOMORROW, Wednesday, July 30th at 2:15 PM  
 
WHERE: New York State Supreme Court, located at at 71 Thomas Street in Manhattan;
                   Room 210 (Justice Mendez).
                   Doors to the second floor courtroom open at 2:00PM.
                   Press Conference with the Plaintiffs to follow directly afterwards
                   on the front steps of the Court

Who:        Petitioners/Plaintiffs and Respondents/Defendants
                in the matter of Sen. Tony Avella v. City of New York
                Index number 100161/2014

What:      Oral argument in New York State Supreme Court

When:      July 30, 2014 at 2:15PM

Where:    71 Thomas Street
                New York, New York 10013
                Courtroom of Justice Manuel Mendez / Part 13 / Room 210

            State Senator Tony Avella of Whitestone, Queens, The City Club of New York, park advocacy groups, and an array of residents and business people neighboring the Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, filed suit today to cut off the threat of construction of a 1.4 million square foot shopping mall within the Park.

            The complaint alleges that the project cannot proceed without approval by the State Legislature under the “public trust” doctrine that protects all parkland throughout the State against any form of transfer or introduction of non-park uses without consent of the Legislature.  It does not appear that any such approval for the shopping center use has been requested or obtained.

            The complaint also alleges violations of the City’s Zoning Resolution and  Charter, and seeks annulment of approvals granted by the City to date for the related Willets Point plan.

            The site is 30.7 acres near the northerly end of the Park.  From 1964 to 2006, the site was occupied by Shea Stadium.  When Shea was demolished and replaced in 2009 by Citi Field at a location slightly east of the Shea site, the project site became a parking field for visitors to Citi Field.  The site has also been used for a variety of public recreational events including foot races, circus performances, an annual wheelchair baseball game, and concerts.

            In 2012, Sterling Equities and the Related Companies, both well-known developers, convinced the Bloomberg administration to allow the shopping mall on Park property, although the City Council had approved a plan in 2008 to place the intended retail development in the neighboring Willets Point development project along with affordable housing.   

            The project has moved forward without the customary public review.  There have been no hearings on it before community boards, the Planning Commission, the City Council, or the State Legislature.  The Bloomberg administration appears to have acted on the assumption that no public review is required because in 1961 the State Legislature approved construction of Shea Stadium and provision for parking, with wording broad enough, say proponents of the project, to allow replacement with a shopping center.  The Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the project on the parking field declares that the parcel is on designated parkland and that legislation permits the shopping mall project.  It lists approvals that the City and developers expect to seek, but State legislative approval is not among them.

             The contention that the 1961 law exempts this transaction from the public trust doctrine, says John Low-Beer, one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers, is wrong.  “The 1961 law was intended to allow a stadium and uses directly related to a stadium, such as parking, concessions, and other commercial activity typically incidental to a professional sports arena.”

            Low-Beer adds that the 1961 law “says nothing about a shopping center.  In fact, the Legislature explicitly prohibited any purely commercial uses other than ones strictly related to the stadium, such as concession stands.  The public trust doctrine requires that any legislative consent be very specific about what it will allow.  If it doesn’t specify a use, then that use is not permitted.”

            Senator Tony Avella stated that “Parks are intended to serve the people, to provide open space, landscaping, opportunities for recreation, playgrounds for children, and escape from the hordes and noise of a busy commercial city.  The only commercial uses that belong in them are those, such as snack stands, that enhance the park experience.  A shopping center is not one of them.  We have a wonderful law that is supposed to assure all of this, known as the ‘public trust doctrine.’  I’m outraged when the people who are supposed to administer parks for everyone turn them over to private interests without seeking the State Legislature's consent as the public trust doctrine requires.  So, I am very pleased to be a party to this action.”

            The plaintiffs include Paul Graziano and Ben Haber who have prominently opposed a spate of recent proposals for new or enlarged sports venues in the Park, as well as the shopping center.  The efforts of “Save Flushing Meadows Park,” a coalition of many Queens civic groups put together by Graziano, Haber and others, thwarted the proposed professional soccer stadium, though it was unable to stop a half-acre expansion of the Tennis Center.  They have also led opposition to the shopping center.

            New York City Park Advocates, a City-wide parks advocacy group that helped to establish “Save Flushing Meadows Park,” is also a plaintiff.  Other plaintiffs are individuals and businesses falling into several categories including nearby residents, park users, and businesses along Roosevelt Avenue and in Willets Point having special concerns about traffic and business displacement.

            The efforts of the “Save Flushing Meadows Park” group were recently bolstered by the City Club which took on the shopping center as a major project after successfully participating in a campaign to defeat a proposed upzoning of the East Midtown area around Grand Central Terminal that would have doubled the permissible bulk in much of the area.  After Council leaders announced in early November that the Council would vote against the plan, Mayor Bloomberg withdrew it.

            Michael Gruen, President of the City Club, said that the City Club joined the shopping center fight out of concern that “Flushing Meadows Park has long suffered from neglect in maintenance and from getting eaten away as a recreational park by a voracious assumption that every new idea for a commercial sporting activity should be given a home in this one Park.  Fortunately some of the worst, such as a proposed “grand prix” race track around the lake, have been defeated.  But this is a beautiful park and it deserves much better treatment.”

            Gruen added that the City Club sees the shopping center project as “perhaps the most egregious example of commercialization of parkland throughout the city.  There are places where the annual cycle of fashion shows and holiday bazaars leave little time for enjoying the open space and landscaping. That it is the worst of a pattern of treating parkland as an asset to be sold off for commercial use caused us to take it on so that we could get the courts to draw a clear line:  commercial uses that do not enhance the recreational experience of parks do not belong in the parks.”

            Gruen said that the City Club hopes “clearly to confirm that any alienation of parkland requires legislative action, very specifically stating what uses are to be allowed.  The legislative consent must then be construed narrowly by the courts so that ambiguities in statutory language cannot be exploited, as the developers here are trying to do, to justify other commercial uses that the legislature had no evident intention of condoning.”

            The case is filed in the New York County Supreme Court.  John Low-Beer, Lorna Goodman and Meredith Feinman represent the plaintiffs.

            The complaint asks the Court to declare that the shopping mall project is illegal and to enjoin further steps toward its construction without compliance with applicable law including the public trust doctrine, and without imposing appropriate zoning regulations on the site.

            It also asks the Court to nullify actions taken by the Planning Commission, and approved by the Council in October of last year, to permit construction of parking facilities in Willets Point in lieu of the affordable housing and supportive facilities called for by the 2008 plan.  The complaint asserts that the Commission and Council knew that the changes in the Willets Point plan were needed for no other purpose than to accommodate stadium parking displaced by the intended shopping center, and knew that the shopping center project itself is illegal without approval of the legislature.  They knew that their action would facilitate illegal construction of the shopping mall, the promoters of which had clearly stated their belief that they could proceed with without legislative approval.  The Commission and Council thereby acted illegally, and arbitrarily and capriciously. 

August 28, 2013

Queens Civic Congress Testimony to New York City CouncilConcerning Proposed Willets Point West Mall at Flushing Meadows Corona Park

The Queens Civic Congress would like to say up front that the proposed Willets Point West Mall
project is an unconscionable alienation of public parkland and the City Council should strike it
down immediately and definitively. The Congress and its members are not happy to have
parkland as part of Flushing Meadows Corona Park used as a parking lot, but we have always
believed if the parking lot became unnecessary the land could quickly and easily be returned to
true public, recreational use. Please say NO to this outrageous land grab.

As many of you know, the Queens Civic Congress is an umbrella organization consisting of over
100 civic associations throughout the Borough. The Congress has been active with the Flushing
Meadows Corona Park Conservancy, the Fairness Coalition of Queens, Save Flushing Meadows
Corona Park and the New York City Parks Advocate over the past several months to help ensure
the Park remains available to the numerous communities in nearby Queens. The Congress has in
the past opposed commercial development in the Park and remains adamantly opposed to any
further encroachment on public spaces.

Flushing Meadows Corona Park is the largest park in Queens and ought to serve as the flagship
park in Queens, but instead it has become the dumping ground of last resort for placing projects
that no other area will accept. CitiField has used many acres of park land on a deal that benefits
only the Mets owners and their profits return very little direct financial benefit to the City, to
Queens or to the Park. The parking lots surrounding the stadium sit on parkland and any change
in use should be subject to alienation requirements.

But the introduction of a massive steel and concrete mall to these western parking lots would
permanently destroy a public park amenity the community should enjoy for recreation and fun.
Not only will the mall remove forever land that could be used by the thousands of nearby
residents, but a mall will destroy hundreds of nearby “mom-and-pop” businesses in surrounding
neighborhoods, introducing potentially devastating competition to existing, struggling malls,
such as the struggling Shops at Atlas Park, Rego Park Mall and even Queens Center Mall.
Furthermore, there is no pedestrian traffic nearby to support a mall. Residential development
plans for Willets Point remain unclear and far in the future.

If, as the City is proposing, the CitiField parking lots are excess and can be repurposed, the space
could better be used by the people for additional picnic and recreational space -- not for stores
and movie theaters that have highly questionable demand and little or no access.

Please preserve our open space at Flushing Meadows Corona Park - just say “No.”

Richard C. Hellenbrecht, President
president@qccnyc.org