The City’s takeover of development and operation of Brooklyn Bridge Park was widely hailed as a way to move the project forward and, perhaps, to find ways to fund park maintenance without relying on revenue from on-site housing and commercial operations. However, critics of these sources of funding are finding little comfort in the City’s plans for a new park operating entity.
The Brooklyn Paper: Meet the new operating “entity” for Brooklyn Bridge Park — same as the old operating “entity” for Brooklyn Bridge Park.
That was the over-riding message delivered by critics of the city’s takeover plan for the $350-million waterfront development, which replaces the state’s development agency with a new city entity that will continue to build the greenspace and residential component without public input.
Roy Sloane, identified in the Brooklyn Paper article as a member of the Cobble Hill Association, is quoted as saying at a hearing yesterday evening that he is “at a loss to find one way in which the public benefits by [the plan].” Sloane’s wife, Judi Francis, identified as president of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund, is quoted as observing that the complex structure of the City’s operating entity “is designed…to keep the public out”. However, State Senator Daniel Squadron was more sanguine about the new entity’s prospects. He noted that, while he understands concern about the entity’s responsiveness to public input, he belives that the inclusion of representatives of elected officials (Squadron, Assembly Member Joan Millman and City Council Member Steve Levin will be represented on the entity’s board) will make it more open and transparent.