Roger That Community Garden May Be Developed

Interestingly Roger That Garden just won another day in court this week, getting an  extension until November 16th.  Go Roger!

These adjournments have two possible effects:

1. It may cause developers to bid less on sites presently occupied by gardeners, because they are such a pain to get rid of. (Effect is good for present gardeners)

2. It may cause owners of vacant land to not be willing to let gardeners use them, even though they tend to foster community and improve the neighborhood land values (Effect is bad for aspiring gardeners).

Which effect is stronger?

Deed fraud is on the rise.  It could be that the "owners" of Roger That Garden bought the lot after it was foreclosed on.  Hence the $10 price.  

Senator Jesse Hamilton is proposing to purchase another garden on Maple Street in Prospect Lefferts Gardens using eminent domain.  Do you get the sense that people are feed up with capitalism and the greed that fuels it?

https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20151023/prospect-lefferts-gardens/brooklyn-senator-moves-seize-community-garden-by-eminent-domain

Here's a link to the story that ran yesterday on WNYC radio about the Maple Street Community Garden.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/brooklyn-neighbors-say-their-garden-could-be-washed-away-rising-tide-deed-fraud/

Capitalism is not going anywhere, whether we are fed up with it or not.

Also, deed fraud does not seem to be in play at the Roger That garden, and has yet to be proven in the case of Maple St.

So, can you comment on my question?

I just did.

So, you believe that this will cause #2 more than #1?

Do you believe the answer lies in symbolic populist gestures by politicians?

Here's a question for you: do you believe in history or do you think that life is just an endless loop, like "Groundhog Day" on steriods?

I believe every moment is distinct and unique.   Hence, I believe in history and the present.

...and that none of us experience it the same way, or assign the same meanings or emotions to it.

Wow, you should be a politician.

Thanks, but politicians don't have much power. I would rather be a deep pocketed developer.

Here's the reason the City has little power over vacant lots and abandoned buildings.

Thanks to Paula Segal Esq. for providing this brief synopsis.  

" In 1996, Mayor Giuliani
decided to stop taking buildings in rem.
Instead, the city would place tax and water liens, a right to seize possession
of the property (as well as emergency repair liens, in which a landlord fails to
repay the city for intervening in hazardous conditions) against a building and
then, after a period of staged warnings, sell the liens to a servicer, which
would then package the liens and sell them as investments. In this way, the city
would get its money up front, and privatize the question of what happened to the
buildings—and their tenants."

http://www.metropolitiques.eu/Managing-New-York-City-s-Rental.html 

I also secretly like my own rights more than I like the rights of others.

"deed fraud ...has yet to be proven in the case of Maple St."

Still not proven, I guess, BUT today the judge in the"quiet title" case in Supreme Court  dismissed the "owners"  case

So, the "owners" have to refile their eviction request?

Two different cases; the one still pending is in Housing Court.

Ok, the eviction case against the gardeners is still pending.

So, the court dismissed the "other case"?    The case brought by the person who claims s/he was the legal heir of the case, and the developers illegally obtained the deed? 

I believe the case that was dismissed was the one seeking to confirm the Makhnay bros. title, after they supposedly "bought" the property from the possibly non-existant "nephew" of the last known owners. According to the gardeners the "nephew" used someone else's Social Security number and the deed bears an illegible notary's signature, with the line for name and license number blank and the city and state of signing misspelled:

http://gothamist.com/2015/10/20/community_garden_deed_fraud.php

So, that case was brought by people who wanted to show that the title was not valid, and a judge dismissed it.

As a result of that case being dismissed, the Makhnay bros can continue with their related case, which seeks to evict the gardeners.

How large will the building be?

 

NO, the result was the OPPOSITE of that--their attempt to validate their title failed

Got it.

So now all the gardeners (defendants) need to do to stop the eviction is demand that the plaintiff's show a validated title.

...and because the plaintiff's can't do that, the eviction case will be dismissed.

So, the next step will be to determine who owns the land.     If that can't be figured out and back taxes are owed on it, the city will get to sell it at auction and put the excess in some kind of escrow account.

I think the site might fetch $1M.

I hope the eviction is stopped as easily as you predict. The last known owner died in the early '90s, so determining who actually owns the land isn't exactly a rapid process.

I believe that determining who owns the land will be a separate process from stopping the eviction.

...in the short term, I believe the only thing that matters is that the plaintiff has been determined to not have a valid instrument proving that they own the land.

Organic carrots for all!

Interestingly Roger That Garden just won another day in court this week, getting an  extension until November 16th.  Go Roger!

That is today.   Here is an action shot:   https://instagram.com/p/-JomwzBXLS/

The gardeners were successful:   The case was discontinued.  

https://twitter.com/596Acres/status/666350144821059584

Did the landlord's not have their act together showing that they were the legal owners?

Some concerned community residents removed an ugly eyesore at the Roger That Garden today.  Seems the "owner's" fence permit had expired.  Much improved view of the mural and garden.  Love the "Not 4 Sale" sign.

Roger That in NY Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/nyregion/community-gardens-imperiled-by-new-yorksaffordable-housing-plans.html
.

Fund raiser and letter writing campaign at Two Saints tomorrow: 

Looks like the gardeners didn't prevail. New fence went up this weekend after the workers pointed the side of the church building. Can construction be far behind?

No new plans have been file since these, so I believe this is what will be built:

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/PropertyProfileOverviewServlet?requestid=2&bin=3031186&allinquirytype=BXS2IQ70   

"An application was filed today for a four-story residential building on the property at 115 Rogers Avenue, also known as 749 Park Place.

The new building would hold six apartments divided across 3,990 square feet of residential space, as well as 1,140 square feet of ground floor commercial retail. That works out to an average apartment of only 665 square feet—almost certainly rentals, and about as small as the zoning code allows for new buildings. 

There will be one apartment on the first floor, and two each on the second, third and fourth floors (adding up to seven apartments, not six)."

http://newyorkyimby.com/2015/04/four-story-building-headed-to-crown-heights-community-garden-at-115-rogers-avenue.html