“Bo” Rodgers Responds to BHA on Tobacco Warehouse

I wonder how many members the BHA has and how that compares to the population of the Brooklyn Heights neighborhood.

I have always wondered if organizations like this truly represent the majority of the neighborhoods that they purport they do.

Pursuit of liberty is no vice… No, that’s not it. You’ll have to pry this park from my cold, dead hands? Not it either. Oh, here it is:

“The ends justify the means.” Yeah, that fits.

I understand the issue and I don’t support the BHA.

Who is next?

This is such a divisive issue. It really saddens me. It isn’t only the BHA’s stand on the issue but the way they are framing it. “Good vs Evil”. Very characteristic of one of our recent presidents. “Rule of Law” also reminds me of certain political party.

I’ve been passing by TWH on a daily basis for years on my way to get the best baguette in NYC at Almondine’s on Water Street (can’t eat dinner without one) and I can assure you that this space was grossly underutilized. No winter program and the summer programs were divided between public events (just a few) and private events (just a few) to pay for the public events. To add to the disutility, a tent would be set up for large portions of the summer only because it was terribly difficult to assemble and disassemble. Those are the facts.

Individuals, like myself, would love to have a facility in this place that accommodates performances year round and maintains the historical integrity of this historical structure. If you have seen the renderings of the proposed site, there is no way possible you could object. it was very tasteful and even maintained a public space for outdoor activity. I could go on and on but I’ve already said way too much.

Just my very humble opinion. A reminder, I still love those that disagree with me. It isn’t personal. And Martin, my good buddy, I’m not screaming. :.)

I am not a member of the BHA and I don’t see anything about that organization that would entice me to join, but the issue here is that public officials lied, they made political accommodations, and they circumvented due process. What is the argument to support that? How can sensible people be of the opinion that government officials should cheat and lie when it’s for a good cause. I mean, hello?

Karl,
What constitutes “grossly underutilized” why does the TW space need to be constantly occupied? If the space is public parkland why can’t it just be that, a unique open space for all to enjoy?
Of course a performance space is nice too but would cater to much less of the public.

Big Dave is correct. The “ruin” of the Tobacco Warehouse is very interesting to peer through, but we should not expect spontaneous occupation. I like it as it is.

Big Dave, I was going to make the same point. I’ve never been inside the Tobacco Warehouse, and I don’t even think I’ve had the opportunity, it always seems to be in use for a private event or either in set-up or take-down stages.

Now, I’ll grant that most of my time near there has been on summer weekends which no doubt skews my view, but I would have been more likely to believe that the Tobacco Warehouse was a private event space than a public park.

I do love the building, and I think it’s beautiful. I also think St. Ann’s is a tremendous organization and keeping them in the neighborhood benefits all of us. So, I guess I’m indifferent to the end result, but I’m not particularly fond of the BHA’s response.

I think the end justifies the means also relates to the fact that they crafted a RFP tailored for St Anns. An RFP for that space and it got two proposals. It didn’t say, in order to be considered, you’re organization must include the words “st ann’s” but it might as well have.

I too like and admire St Ann’s.

Karl,
>>If you have seen the renderings of the proposed site, there is no way possible you could object.<<

I have seen the renderings, and I object.

The plaintiffs are claiming that officials lied and deliberately evaded the law in order to accommodate the private party who is benefiting from the gift of public parkland. The government officials are claiming that they did not lie or bend the rules but rather rectified a old error or typo that somehow identified the TW and the Empire Stores as being within public parkland.
Now, I have lived in this area a long time. It has always been my belief that those structures were certainly part of the park. They are in fact the main identifying features of the park. It is an extraordinary fib on the part of the defendants to claim that these public buildings were never intended to be a part of the public park and that therefore cutting them out of the park was merely a way to correct an old error.

Those who assert that the TW was underutilized are partially correct. The state closed it to the public in 2008 except for a few events. But in the years before there was many public events and, yes, private events that supported the public free stuff. Was this perfect? Probably not but it was a roadmap as to how this place could be used by many people enjoying a variety of things. So the difference of opinion is whether a single entity (fine theater non profit with exciting works but no public programs) and a publically controlled space that provides events and programs for a variety of park users.

@carol – Did you read the RFP when it was publicly available? I did and I can tell you that there was a big emphasis in the RFP that whoever won the RFP was going to have to provide a significant amount of public programming, either in the TW itself or elsewhere in the park. This was also highlighted when the Park folks presented the plans at Borough Hall a couple of months ago. If your primary concern is about the use of TW for public programming then you should be in favor of the St Ann’s plan:

1)The have committed to providing public programming of their own (like the free Fela concert they put together last summer that unfortunately got rained out)

2) They have committed to provide the smaller space in the newly built building to community groups and non-profits to use for public programming

3) Unlike the public programming that used to take place in the TW, the stuff being contemplated here can happen year-round and will not be weather dependent so there’s a good chance there can be MORE of it than there used to be.

@Arch Stanton = NIMBY

Tobacco Whorehouse,

Funny you mentioned the “Fela!” concert, I filmed a portion that is quite enjoyable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VWXqY81d3Q

No way Big Dave, then I could be considered a shill for St. Ann’s.

I’m just an independent filmmaker with an independent voice. ;.)

You know-The BHB is the new Citizen’s Band Channel 10-the same personalities, the same social positions only twenty years late (sans much of the obscenities)

All that aside, the question remains of the overall EFFECT of the
space, as distinct from and in combination to the park.

There are two seperate planes of consideration which must be analized seperately.

But in BOTH the effect on and the financial and functional tax on the overall area must be carefully measured…

And again, its the size type of event and the “demography” it draws which are the keys to what the effect will be.

Whats the effect of Bargemusic on the area? Its small and ads
a VERY dignified tone to the area. Because of the size and the
quality of the human material it attracts.

So what will be the material the space will attract and what will
be that material’s effect on the resources ofthe area.

Like the larger park issue, hom much of MY safety and security resources will be taken away or thined to cover you little “project”
that you and wonderful St Ann’s wants to establish.

Again, why dont you ask some of the older residents who have lived through YEARS of the actuial effects of having St Ann’s
influence on the 2nd Appelate court area? what they “think”
about St ann’s and the quality of thier management?