Housing

“No Pain,” But Lots of Spin

Columbia Deal Avoids Eminent Domain Pain trumpeted yesterday’s New York Post headline. After all the struggle over Columbia University’s plan for a new campus in the Manhattanville neighborhood, which I […]

Columbia Deal Avoids Eminent Domain Pain trumpeted yesterday’s New York Post headline. After all the struggle over Columbia University’s plan for a new campus in the Manhattanville neighborhood, which I covered for Shelterforce earlier this year (Will Columbia Take Manhattanville?), it’s tempting to latch onto something that sounds like good news and a resolution of bitter conflict and breathe a sigh of relief.

Unfortunately, the pain being avoided is mostly Columbia’s. The agreement with the Empire State Development Corporation specifies only no residential eminent domain, something Columbia long ago promised to commit to. There are only a few residential buildings in the new campus’s footprint, and the ones most at issue are owned by the City of New York, so displacement could occur there without any eminent domain, just by never turning over ownership to the tenants through the Tenant Interim Lease program as had been the plan for many years. Those buildings are also in the footprint of the second phase of Columbia’s plan, leaving many years for agreements to shift and be qualified or as Ron Shiffman of the Pratt Center for Community Development put it, “be massaged,” before their final fate is settled.

Meanwhile, the agreement doesn’t cover commercial eminent domain, which is the topic that is the most contentious in the redevelopment scheme, with two remaining commercial building owners, whose buildings house many tenants who employ many people, still refusing to sell.

So kudos to Columbia for scoring a PR victory, but shame on a credulous press that should have known well just how little this agreement actually meant.

Related Articles

  • Illustration of a right hand holding a small red two-dimensional house between thumb and index finger. The hand is dark blue and the arm, shown a bit beyond the wrist, is wearing a white shirt and suit jacket. The background of the image is a city skyline, in lighter shades of the same blue, with puffy clouds above.

    Ownership Matters: Institutional Investors and Corporate Ownership

    May 23, 2024

    Who owns our homes is an absolutely essential part of housing policy, and an even greater part of housing politics.

  • A Black woman in blue flowered dress and dusty pink hijab speaks into several microphones. In foreground, blurry, are news cameras. The woman is part of a large group at a rally, carrying signs promoting rent stabilization and saying "Home to Stay MPLS"

    Affordable Housing Sector Split on Rent Control

    May 21, 2024

    In the Twin Cities, where voters have recently supported rent control, most nonprofit housing developers have stayed silent, and some have openly lined up with the developers and landlords who oppose it.

  • Seven people wearing jackets and caps on a city sidewalk holding signs that say "Listen to UREB," "Save Our Homes," "Negotiate with UREB," or "5,000 Against Displacement." One person is speaking into a microphone. At the curb by the speaker is a van with WRLC painted on the side, for Western Reserve Land Conservancy.

    Nonprofit to Close Mobile Home Community to Build a Park

    May 10, 2024

    Ohio’s largest conservation land trust has been accused of purchasing a manufactured housing community with the very intention of closing it, evicting more than 100 households in the process. But proponents of the park’s closure say the land's failing infrastructure—and the benefit the property will bring to an entire city—is what forced the decision.