What? Zuccotti Park is privately owned??? Dammit!

[arcane1]

I just read a quote from the mayor, who referenced "the park’s owner, Brookfield Properties." I immediately thought of Naomi Klein's great book "No Logo", where she goes into the trend of privatizing formerly public spaces.

If this is true, then the 1st amendment doesn't apply in Zuccotti Park, and the park's owners can allow or disallow any people or activities they choose. It's private property, and thus anyone on that property can be considered a trespasser.

I really did NOT want to start my day with that news. Every god-damned thing has been sold out from under us! :grr::mad:

[Capitalocracy]

1. Zuccoti Park was sold but not 100% privatized

It was sold on the condition that it remain a public space. And the rules for public spaces apply. The private property angle is a deception.

And if they care so damn much about private property, why did they crush all those protesters' possessions?

(On edit: As pointed out below, I'm wrong, it was private, later made public in exchange for special building permits. My bad)

[arcane1]

4. Whew!! Thanks for this clarification

I'm now slightly less peeved :) :toast:

[Capitalocracy]

18. Yeah, I can't believe they think they can get away with this lie

But think about it, if it were really just a simple matter of people occupying a private space... those people would've been arrested for trespassing on day one.

And instead of less peeved, maybe you should be more peeved, considering the fact that they're stealing the protesters' belongings, kicking them off public land to deny their freedom of speech, and then lying about the justification.

:toast:

[FarLeftFist]

9. Yeah, they were forced to create the public space because corps have no interest in aesthetics or

quality of life. I'm sure they made the space begrudgingly. They hated every minute of having to build it.

[dkf]

10. I thought it was always private and was built to get a permit for a high rise.

[Capitalocracy]

13. I don't know, you could be right

I'm not too familiar with the history of how it came about, but I have heard that it's sort of a private-public hybrid where it essentially acts as a public space.

[MADem]

19. That was my understanding, too as I indicated below. nt

[brooklynite]

15. Incorrect...

The block was always private property. It was converted from buildings to a park in 1968 in exchange for adding additional floors to 1 Liberty Plaze (then the US Steel Building).

[Lint Head]

2. Occupy the world! We are all being supressed by the mega rich.

[grasswire]

3. Bloomberg's wife is part of Brookfield Properties

Does the article talk about that conflict of interest?

[stellanoir]

12. She's not his wife but they live together.

[Rochester]

5. If we had a government with the balls to...

...sharply curtail property rights outside one's place of residence, this wouldn't be a problem.

[Vincardog]

6. Zuccotti Park was created so the co could get a variance on their zoning. The deal makes it

accessible to the public and the public has More rights to be on it than if it was a public owned park.
Chill

[dkf]

14. But Brookfield is responsible for its upkeep.

[Vincardog]

16. As long as it is open to the public 24/7

[northoftheborder]

7. That history about how the park became private property was discussed on the blog earlier.

The owners were persuaded to not press their rights to oust the OWS by the mayor or city of NY, I think......

[ret5hd]

8. this has been gone over a dozen times over weeks and weeks.

the owners of the land wanted zoning variances to build on the prop. the city forced them to "make" the park in return for the variances. one of the conditions on this park was that it be open to the public 24/7, no exceptions. when the owners of the property demolish the building with zoning variances on it, they get the park back. not before. it is owned privately, but it is open to the public, by law, 24/7.

[Hugin]

11. If it's private then they should hire a private security force to protect it.

Protesters pay their taxes too... Unlike major corporations, lately.

[MADem]

17. They made a deal with the city in exchange for building variances.

I think this is how it goes--if anyone knows more, please add:

They retain the ownership of the property (which I imagine means they pay taxes on it).

They got a height variance (I think) on one or more buildings.

The city gets, in exchange for that height variance, park space that the public can use 'passively' (i.e. transiting; having a seat and eating your lunch, meeting your date, that kind of thing).

If the building ever comes down, the deal may be off. OR.... the deal could be nixed if the city says they don't need a park there anymore.

That's my understanding of the deal, anyway.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. "Property is theft." - Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

"The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying 'This is mine,' and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody." Jean-Jacques Rousseau